Jump to content

Photo

Remembering Cybermorph


175 replies to this topic

#26 Gunstar OFFLINE  

Gunstar

    Gunstar

  • 7,432 posts
  • Location:Canyon Lake TEXAS

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:37 PM

Posting those two links only showed me that most people with
working vision can Clearly see that Cybermorph is superior, in both color and crispness AND FRAME RATE.


But not color choice, imagination, or design.

Sorry Gorf, but that's my first time seeing it, and my first thought was that it'd be an awesome tech demo for the Amiga, if anyone wanted to try it. But between the fog, and the empty world, I was reminded less of an epic space adventure and more of those tiny suckerfish that clean aquariums out...

It's great if you're looking for a neglected game to love and nurture, or something Zen to occupy your hands while you add up your bills, but there's a reason Starfox shot it down at retail.


I just checked out both of those Utube videos and whom ever did that Cybermorph movie isn't even showing cybermorphs better levels or scenes, with tons of enemies and buildings, or even the best levels with cool mountains and valleys or it's cool gameplay, it's obviously a hand-picked "show" in an attempt to once again make the Jaguar look bad, and it STILL looks better than Star Fox techinally, but that certainly isn't the best Cybermorph "movie" that could be made. And as for StarFox, it shotdown the Cybermorph in retail, one, becuase Cybermorph was a PACK-IN game, not even sold seperately until a year or two later, and as everyone knows, Nintendo had bottomless pockets back then for marketing, while Atari had a shoe-string budget and almost non-existant advertising. PERIOD. Oh, and if there was a movie on Utube of it to show, but there's not, I could show you a 16-bit Atari STE game called Zero5 (nothing like the jaguar version) that blows away StarFox graphically, in framerate, and in design and gameplay. Or, a game called Epic, or Reach for the Skies, or many others just using a 68000 chip!

But this argument was about tech more than gameplay and NO ONE here is saying that Cybermorph is a tour-de-force Jaguar game in tech OR gameplay. How about a comparison of StarFox to Battlemorph or Iron Soldier 1&2, etc.? PLEASE! your argument is just as lame as the others. But I still like the GAMEPLAY of Cybermorph MUCH better than StarFox, but of course that's an OPINION, just like yours and theirs.

Now, how about we compare the ON-RAILS StarFox shooter to OTHER on-rails shooters for the Jaguar (and Sega CD) which BLOW AWAY StarFox graphically, on EITHER the SEGA CD or Jaguar and they are even SPRITE based, instead of polygons!!!
Unfortunately these movies are very dark and grainy and don't show it all that well, AND they don't show the incredible on-planet levels similiar to StarFox. but that's all I can find right now. I wish there were better example movies of Soul Star for the Jag&Sega CD to show...can someone help me out with that? But at least they are far more similiar types of games to Starfox and far more suited to show how inferior StarFox is to them, in regards to on-rails shooters. Cybermorph is in a completely different league (like NFL compared to Arena AFL) and is so technically superior it shouldn'g even be compared to SF.



Edited by Gunstar, Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:54 PM.


#27 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 2:57 PM

Posting those two links only showed me that most people with
working vision can Clearly see that Cybermorph is superior, in both color and crispness AND FRAME RATE.


But not color choice, imagination, or design.

Sorry Gorf, but that's my first time seeing it, and my first thought was that it'd be an awesome tech demo for the Amiga, if anyone wanted to try it. But between the fog, and the empty world, I was reminded less of an epic space adventure and more of those tiny suckerfish that clean aquariums out...

It's great if you're looking for a neglected game to love and nurture, or something Zen to occupy your hands while you add up your bills, but there's a reason Starfox shot it down at retail.



Someone posted the best SNES level vs the first and simplest level of cybermorph.
Another neat trick. Instead of looking at a comparison video clearly set up to bolster
an argument play the game. It will out last star fox by many hours. There is nothing
neglected about Cybermorph.

Market? I dont think so.

Try to think about this. It was out first and Nintendo had quite a lock on the market with
the SNES already. Come now...they were not ever in direct competition... and even more
so...buy a brand new title-less unproven $250 dollar system or a popular systems killer
app at $50? Come now...hardly fair.

#28 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:16 PM

The Jaguar can do Star Fox in higher color and higher FPS and more detail with just
using the 68k for the game logic. Something i typically recommend against.

If you want to compare a taste in game, you cant argue opinion. I have to argue
tech as the posts come across as if they are indeed challenging the tech.

You call Cybermorph's anything BUT flat landscapes (dynamically generated BTW) 'flat'
whileposting the simplest level of the game and act as if Star Fox has a a landscape at
all! It's all flat except for buildings and its 8 bit(256) vs 16 bit(65536) colors and you want
to tell me its even close? Not even close. Cyber morph could never be done on the SNES
even with the SuperFX chip.The Jaguar does not need a Super FX chip either. BattleMorph
is ATD's chance to do more than a port like it was.

The sad thing is you are comparing a seriously large effort in Star Fox to get it to do that
even with the Super FX chip, to a game that was with probably a few code line changes,
from a port of a game writeen for an entirely different system. A first effort at that.

I can live with your opinion of Star Fox as a game but technically the jaguar like it or not
is pumping out a heck of a lot more horsepower than you'll ever see from a stock or SfX
SNES game and you are right, the Jag is hardly doing anything yet. Not to mention a
comparison to Cybermorph as a game is like apples and oranges. They are not even close
in concept.

Edited by Gorf, Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:17 PM.


#29 phuzaxeman OFFLINE  

phuzaxeman

    Moonsweeper

  • 475 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:28 PM

yeah, everything Gorf said. And as a matter of fact, I DO shut the music off in Tempest 2K and the game is STILL JUST AS FUN TO PLAY! As I and Gorf BOTH stated, the SNES had the superFX chip on cart, I can GUARANTEE that someone could put a RISC chip on a Jaguar cartridge, and along with it and the Jag's in-console RISCs, it could blow away not only the PSX and Saturn, but even the N64 with another RISC in the cart. How do I know? Well, becuase a RISC chip that is better than any RISC chip in ANY of the other consoles could be used, the people who might do this are free to choose an incredible RISC chip to put in that cart! Kind of like what Jagware is planning with the Jag CF cart.
And as far as fighting games? You are CLEARLY forgetting Ultra Vortek which looks and sounds and plays better than those SNES fighters, which is a FACT, except for the playability which is opinion. And my opinion is it blows away those SNES fighters. Get a grip. You call ME delusional? Well, I can understand the reason becuase I called you that, but it's black and white that I'm right and you are WRONG.

It's easy to add a chip(s) in a cartridge (or add-on like the 32X) and greatly improve a system far above it's original potential, and the SNES AND Genesis/32X STILL can't compete with a first-gen Jaguar game that's using about 25% of the Jaguar's potential (if programmed right without the 68000 as the main in-game processor, as it SHOULD be).

Just please go away and go hump your SNES and 32X's guys. Quit embarrassing yourselves with complete stupidity. And I like the 32X, but the SNES always sucked and still does. Atari's portable Lynx can outshine the SNES, just look at games like Cybervirus, Blue Lightning, BattleWheels and many others, and it ain't using another chip on a cart or other cheat!


remember this...i'm an atari fan and a gamer fan too. ive got every atari system (yeah flashback 1 and 2 even.) but the jag is what it is. probably the worst atari console probably tied to the 7800 console yet had the most potential. the lynx is the best atari system if you're counting on great games and actually slaughters the jaguar in every category. matter of fact, if atari would have stuck with working on more lynx stuff, it would have gotten more press, better sales, could have progressed even further. a smaller lighter lynx 3 would have made more sense than the jaguar in my opinion.

as far as ultra vortek, that game sucks all the way around. dont take it personal. i hate that game. a poor mans mortal kombat/street fighter. mortal kombat 2 looks better, sounds better, controls better, and is close to the arcade for a 16 bit console.

i don't own a 32x so i could care less how it compares to the jag.

get with reality....i've owned the jag since early 94 (that's saying a lot compared to most owners on here). yeah, i bought it for around $250 (its been a while)....i'm not saying things for the sake of arguement.

Edited by phuzaxeman, Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:31 PM.


#30 superjudge3 OFFLINE  

superjudge3

    Moonsweeper

  • 459 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:35 PM

The only thing I have against Cybermorph is that ity gets boring and repetitive after the first 4 or 5 planets. It's a fun game to play occasionally but I couldn't sit down to beat it if I wanted too...it just gets too old too quick.

#31 phuzaxeman OFFLINE  

phuzaxeman

    Moonsweeper

  • 475 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 3:43 PM

The only thing I have against Cybermorph is that ity gets boring and repetitive after the first 4 or 5 planets. It's a fun game to play occasionally but I couldn't sit down to beat it if I wanted too...it just gets too old too quick.


and 1.

#32 spiffyone OFFLINE  

spiffyone

    Moonsweeper

  • 292 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:37 PM

As much as Cybermorph was a technical "marvel" at the time, IMHO Star Fox on SNES was a better game. Two different types of games though. One is an on rail shooter, the other a 3D space shooter.

You'll note I put "marvel" in quotees. That's because the game was a Panther game, really, and rushed on the Jag. It didn't do anywhere near what hte Jag could really do. See Battlemorph for what Jaguar could really do with a game that is developed from the ground up on it. And even though it's a Jag CD game, the Jag CD, to my knowledge, didn't really add processors or anything to Jaguar; it just added CD capabilities. I don't know the size of Battlemorph (how many MBs), but I do know that some Jag CD games were moved to cartridge, and even the pretty damn great looking Iron Soldier 2 is on cartridge, so I gather Battlemorph could be too. Regardless, that's the game that shows what Jag could do (and even then not really, as it's 68k intensive).

But, again, I had more fun with Star Fox on SNES, and way, way, way more fun with Star Fox 64 on N64. I wish Atari had made an on rail space shooter to really show how much more advanced Jag was compared to the 16-bit consoles. From what I've seen of Zero 5's on rail section it is very, very impressive for Jaguar and definitely something that could never, ever be done on the 16-bit consoles without major, major downgrading.

I hope to get that cart at some point, btw (Zero 5). Looks damned good. So does Iron Soldier 2. But, cheapassgamer that I am...I'm not paying more than $40 for a Jag game.

#33 spiffyone OFFLINE  

spiffyone

    Moonsweeper

  • 292 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 5:51 PM

And as far as fighting games? You are CLEARLY forgetting Ultra Vortek which looks and sounds and plays better than those SNES fighters, which is a FACT, except for the playability which is opinion. And my opinion is it blows away those SNES fighters.

I'm sorry...there's opinions, and then there's WRONG opinions. And saying that Ultra Vortek is a better fighter than SFII, even the SNES version (gimped from the arcade version) is an exmple of a wrong opinion. ;)

Seriously, though...SFII remains, to this day, a highly playable fighting game particular in competition. Ultra Vortek? Nice looking game, better than SFII or MKII on SNES, but not anywhere near an example of a good fighting game. Then again, neither are any of the MK games, except maybe MKII, and that's a stretch.

Graphics don't really mean a damn thing in fighting games anyway. There's some really good looking fighting games out there that play like absolute crap. And some really crappy looking ones that play like friggin' gold.

But...yeah...even SFII wasn't really playable on SNES. That controller was ass compared to the Genesis 6-button controller which led to the perfect for fighting games Saturn pad.

Anyway, back on topic, comparing Star Fox SNES to Cybermorph isn't fair either way. Different types of shooters, Cybermorph was a Panther game, etc.

Now, compare Star Fox SNES to the on rail sections of Zero 5, and you see just how much the Jag craps all over the SNES.

#34 phuzaxeman OFFLINE  

phuzaxeman

    Moonsweeper

  • 475 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:39 PM

And as far as fighting games? You are CLEARLY forgetting Ultra Vortek which looks and sounds and plays better than those SNES fighters, which is a FACT, except for the playability which is opinion. And my opinion is it blows away those SNES fighters.

I'm sorry...there's opinions, and then there's WRONG opinions. And saying that Ultra Vortek is a better fighter than SFII, even the SNES version (gimped from the arcade version) is an exmple of a wrong opinion. ;)

Seriously, though...SFII remains, to this day, a highly playable fighting game particular in competition. Ultra Vortek? Nice looking game, better than SFII or MKII on SNES, but not anywhere near an example of a good fighting game. Then again, neither are any of the MK games, except maybe MKII, and that's a stretch.

Graphics don't really mean a damn thing in fighting games anyway. There's some really good looking fighting games out there that play like absolute crap. And some really crappy looking ones that play like friggin' gold.

But...yeah...even SFII wasn't really playable on SNES. That controller was ass compared to the Genesis 6-button controller which led to the perfect for fighting games Saturn pad.

Anyway, back on topic, comparing Star Fox SNES to Cybermorph isn't fair either way. Different types of shooters, Cybermorph was a Panther game, etc.

Now, compare Star Fox SNES to the on rail sections of Zero 5, and you see just how much the Jag craps all over the SNES.

that's you're opinion on the controllers. i thought the snes controllers were fine. the streetfighter vs mk could go on forever....

part of my resentment with ultra was that it was getting alot of hype and i was finally going to have a "great" fighting game on the jag. when i finally got U.V., i was completely disappointed. keep in mind that this was the time when U.V. just came out. people were saying this was streetfighter MK killer. what a joke. plus, this game was pretty expensive during that time.

zero 5 had amazing graphics and the sound was better than cybermorph....but in no way does it even compare to starfox as a complete game. zero 5 is another example of something that looks great on the outside but lacks on the inside.

#35 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:49 PM

zero 5 had amazing graphics and the sound was better than cybermorph....but in no way does it even compare to starfox as a complete game. zero 5 is another example of something that looks great on the outside but lacks on the inside.



Again likeing StarFox is an opinion. I played it, was not very impressed by it(never usually am
with on rails shooters) and I definitely do not rate it about cybermorph....it s all about taste
and you are certainly allowed to like what you will. Technically there is no comparing the two.
I for one think cybermorph is a way better game.

#36 superjudge3 OFFLINE  

superjudge3

    Moonsweeper

  • 459 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:06 PM

I was one of the kids that grew up with a NES and SNES and believe me, back in 1993 when Starfox came out...there was nothing else quite like it. Everyone that had a SNES was blown away by it. And nobody I knew had even heard of the Atari Jaguar until about '96 when it was dying already. I didn't know Cybermorph existed until 2005. :)

Back in 1993 Star Fox was athe Alpha and Omega of space shooters for all of us kids who had SNES's and the Genesis...no one had a clue about Cybermorph...it was all Star Fox, Star Fox, Star Fox.

#37 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 8:14 PM

I was one of the kids that grew up with a NES and SNES and believe me, back in 1993 when Starfox came out...there was nothing else quite like it. Everyone that had a SNES was blown away by it. And nobody I knew had even heard of the Atari Jaguar until about '96 when it was dying already. I didn't know Cybermorph existed until 2005. :)

Back in 1993 Star Fox was athe Alpha and Omega of space shooters for all of us kids who had SNES's and the Genesis...no one had a clue about Cybermorph...it was all Star Fox, Star Fox, Star Fox.



I'm not saying otherwise. Im only pointing out the fact that Starfox was done well after the SNES
was released and developers knew the system well. Cybermorph a first effort and a port at that,
is regardless of what you think of the game is by far more technically advanced when you consider
a first effort.

#38 superjudge3 OFFLINE  

superjudge3

    Moonsweeper

  • 459 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 9:02 PM

Gorf, I was just adding my two cents...I wasn't even thinking about your comments when I wrote it. I tend to agree with everything you say...specially what you say over in the Jaguar vs 32X thread. I've learned a lot from that thread...hope you guys keep arguing so I keep learning about the Jag. :) ;)

Also, about a year ago before you came around, I wrote a topic that started out as "Forget Star Fox, Cybermorph is way better"! Or along those same lines. I think Cybermorph is WAY better than Star Fox. I'd take it anyday over Starfox, and you're right, it is way more impressive. I was just explaining the history behind most people and Star Fox/Cybermorph. Most people didn't even know it existed in '93.

Edited by superjudge3, Wed Jul 11, 2007 9:06 PM.


#39 superjudge3 OFFLINE  

superjudge3

    Moonsweeper

  • 459 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 9:36 PM

Gorf, I was just adding my two cents...I wasn't even thinking about your comments when I wrote it. I tend to agree with everything you say...specially what you say over in the Jaguar vs 32X thread. I've learned a lot from that thread...hope you guys keep arguing so I keep learning about the Jag. :) ;)

Also, about a year ago before you came around, I wrote a topic that started out as "Cybermorph is way better"! Or along those same lines. I think Cybermorph is WAY better than Star Fox. I'd take it anyday over Starfox, and you're right, it is way more impressive. I was just explaining the history behind most people and Star Fox/Cybermorph. Most people didn't even know it existed in '93.

Here's that old topic about Star Fox and Cybermorph:

http://www.atariage....showtopic=75331



#40 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 10:31 PM

Gorf, I was just adding my two cents...I wasn't even thinking about your comments when I wrote it. I tend to agree with everything you say...specially what you say over in the Jaguar vs 32X thread. I've learned a lot from that thread...hope you guys keep arguing so I keep learning about the Jag. :) ;)

Also, about a year ago before you came around, I wrote a topic that started out as "Forget Star Fox, Cybermorph is way better"! Or along those same lines. I think Cybermorph is WAY better than Star Fox. I'd take it anyday over Starfox, and you're right, it is way more impressive. I was just explaining the history behind most people and Star Fox/Cybermorph. Most people didn't even know it existed in '93.



No argument here. It's just for those who come across as if they want to say the SNES is a
better technical effort....in the sense of the fact that its the SNES yes.You'd be foolish to say
its not impressive, but certainly no megabyte pumping going on there either. We are talking
MEGABYTES, 106 of them that can be moved around the Jaguar in any given second(with a really
well written program you'll get 75% of that performance.) You are not even comming close to
that with an SNES, not even in Star Fox. Again its a really great trick and certainly a plus to SNES
owners but Cybermorph is doing just so much more and still not hammering the jag doing it... at all!

#41 supercat OFFLINE  

supercat

    Quadrunner

  • 6,399 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 10:35 PM

Short draw distance of polygons?!? All games at this time, that could even compare to Cybermorph suffered from the same thing.


One thing which some of the better 3D games have done is structure levels to limit the number of simultaneously visible polygons without having to have them vanish within view. There should be a logic to such approaches (beyond simply saying 'hmm... the game gets slow here--maybe I should stick in a wall') but they can help enormously with speed.

I wonder if Cybermorph would have had a better 'feel' if the action took place underground, as in Descent?

#42 Rev. Rob OFFLINE  

Rev. Rob

    Stargunner

  • Topic Starter
  • 1,251 posts
  • Reverend
  • Location:Phoenix, AZ

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 10:38 PM

Gunstar, Gorf, you two are absolutely beyond fanatical.

Claustraphobic levels?!? They are open and 360 degree, and larger than just about anything at the time.


The levels are itty bitty. The claustrophobia is further confounded by the fact that you're forced to fly through a maze of hills that you cannot fly over.

Short draw distance of polygons?!? All games at this time, that could even compare to Cybermorph suffered from the same thing.


That's really not an excuse. It causes the game to hold up poorly.

Enemies popping out of thin air?!? You can see the enemies at LEAST all the way to the edge of draw distance, which is far enough.


Not really.

Flight sim?!? If you think it's a flight sim, your dead wrong. It's not a similation AT ALL! It's a 3D shooter!


I didn't call it that.

Have you even played the game more than 5 minutes? I doubt it!


That's an interesting defense... ďpretend.Ē If you pretend that I havenít played Cybermorph, a game that Iíve owned for over a decade, does that alone make you right? Pretending?

Adequate tech demo?!? Diehard Gamefan crowned it GAME OF THE MONTH back in the day! And they said it shit all over StarFox at the time! I have the magazine that they wrote about a 7 PAGE review glorifying the game as the FUTURE!!!


But they were wrong, weren't they? First of all, I didn't review the game in 1993, I did it last night. Second, virtually no other publication ranks it so high.

From AtariAge:

Electric Escape Atari Archives (by Robert A. Jung) 65%
The Atari Times (by Gregory D. George) 60%
Game Zero Magazine (by Unknown) --
Justclaws JagSite (by Unknown) 60%
Video Game Critic (by David Mrozek) 65%



Average Score: 63%


6.3 out of 10... that's a score that I can agree with.

Jaguar and Cybermorph forgotten almost as soon as they came?!? YO! Jerk, here it is 14 years later and you are talking about BOTH!!!

Not only are you a troll, but a ignorant and stupid one too!


Such harsh name-calling over a video game review? Jerk, Troll, ignorant, stupid... Did someone once beat you up with a Cybermorph cart or something? A little bit of 'acting like an adult' would not be a bad thing, you know?

Now don't get me wrong that I'm a Cybermorph fanboy or that I think it's "all that" even compared to later Jaguar titles or it's sequel (which IS "all that"), but it deserves it's props in Jaguar and general gaming history. And no putz like you who most likely wasn't even there (I don't mean you weren't alive, but just that you were probably a SNES or Genesis fanboy at the time) at the Jag's or Cybermorph's release is going to be taken seriously with your half-wit opinions.


You're not a fanboy, but you managed to call me three more names and use your Ďpretendí defense again. Hmm... Ya, I donít believe you.

No console on its best day before the Jaguar could come close to what Cybermorph.
was doing. It had no competiton unless you want to include a decent PC(of that time.)


Or 3DO...

Perhaps we should start a thread called "Remembering Rev. Bob" how he
could not handle the fact that Cybermorph is enough proof alone that Jaguar
is superior to 32x.


Star Wars Arcade is much, much more graphically intensive than Cypermorph. More polygons, no draw distance problems. That argument is not based on fact, but fantasy.


32X cant do as detailed a game as Cybermorph.


Except a number of 32X games (Star Wars Arcade, DarXide, Virtua Racing Deluxe, and so on), are more detailed than Cybermorph.

By the way, what does all of this nitpicking have to do with Cybermorph anyways? Thatís not a rhetorical question, by the way, I expect an answer.

As a game it does not need to be compared to other games that came out many years later on 32X, Playstation, Saturn, or 3DO. It does not need to be compared to games of its own time. It merely needs to stand on its own merit as a game. When it does that, it's roughly a 6 out of 10, even this many years later. That's actually not too bad.

None of this nitpicking will also change the fact that unlike Battlemorph, which is an excellent game, Cybermorph suffers from dull and uninspired game play. It plays like a bonus level of a Sonic game (get the blue spheres, get the rings, et cetera). Fetching pods is not compelling game play. The lack of an ability to keep your progress is not immersive.

Funny how you employ a fallacy of logic to distract from facts about the game called Cybermorph by attacking a console called 32X that was released three years later. Once certainly has nothing to do with the other. Your non-defense of the game only exemplifies its inherent short comings.

#43 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 11:01 PM

None of this nitpicking will also change the fact that unlike Battlemorph, which is an excellent game, Cybermorph suffers from dull and uninspired game play. It plays like a bonus level of a Sonic game (get the blue spheres, get the rings, et cetera). Fetching pods is not compelling game play. The lack of an ability to keep your progress is not immersive.


Your opinions and only your opinions which of course you an entitled to even if they are not mainstream.


Funny how you employ a fallacy of logic to distract from facts about the game called Cybermorph by attacking a console called 32X that was released three years later. Once certainly has nothing to do with the other. Your non-defense of the game only exemplifies its inherent short comings.


I think I defended it well and I brought up the 32X because you seem to be a fan boy.
Im a fan boy of the Jaguar but I base everything I tell you on both knowledge and
experience with the JAguar for the past 12+ years. I own a 32 X It's not a total pile
of shit but it is a lot les than it should have been considering the Jaguar.

Oh and 3DO has half the bandwidth of the Jaguar.

50 Meg/sec 3DO

106 Meg/sec Jaguar.

#44 Rev. Rob OFFLINE  

Rev. Rob

    Stargunner

  • Topic Starter
  • 1,251 posts
  • Reverend
  • Location:Phoenix, AZ

Posted Wed Jul 11, 2007 11:33 PM

None of this nitpicking will also change the fact that unlike Battlemorph, which is an excellent game, Cybermorph suffers from dull and uninspired game play. It plays like a bonus level of a Sonic game (get the blue spheres, get the rings, et cetera). Fetching pods is not compelling game play. The lack of an ability to keep your progress is not immersive.


Your opinions and only your opinions which of course you an entitled to even if they are not mainstream.


Acording to AtariAge, they are.

Even in the face of overwhelming evidence (which you ignore), you march on in defiance. Why is that?

I think I defended it well


You actually didn't offer a single word of defense. If I attacked Playstation, that doesn't make Bug II a better game, just like you randomly attacking 32X doesn't help the case for Cybermorph.

and I brought up the 32X because you seem to be a fan boy.


More with the name calling. And even supposing your assumption were to be true, it still doesn't help to redeem the game.

Im a fan boy of the Jaguar


No doubt.

#45 Atariboy OFFLINE  

Atariboy

    Quadrunner

  • 5,059 posts
  • River Raider
  • Location:North Country

Posted Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:34 AM

At the end of the day, Star Fox was enjoyable to play and to look at, Cybermorph wasn't for me.

So I have no doubt which the better game was.

#46 phuzaxeman OFFLINE  

phuzaxeman

    Moonsweeper

  • 475 posts

Posted Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:55 AM

Gunstar, Gorf, you two are absolutely beyond fanatical.

Claustraphobic levels?!? They are open and 360 degree, and larger than just about anything at the time.


The levels are itty bitty. The claustrophobia is further confounded by the fact that you're forced to fly through a maze of hills that you cannot fly over.

Short draw distance of polygons?!? All games at this time, that could even compare to Cybermorph suffered from the same thing.


That's really not an excuse. It causes the game to hold up poorly.

Enemies popping out of thin air?!? You can see the enemies at LEAST all the way to the edge of draw distance, which is far enough.


Not really.

Flight sim?!? If you think it's a flight sim, your dead wrong. It's not a similation AT ALL! It's a 3D shooter!


I didn't call it that.

Have you even played the game more than 5 minutes? I doubt it!


That's an interesting defense... ďpretend.Ē If you pretend that I havenít played Cybermorph, a game that Iíve owned for over a decade, does that alone make you right? Pretending?

Adequate tech demo?!? Diehard Gamefan crowned it GAME OF THE MONTH back in the day! And they said it shit all over StarFox at the time! I have the magazine that they wrote about a 7 PAGE review glorifying the game as the FUTURE!!!


But they were wrong, weren't they? First of all, I didn't review the game in 1993, I did it last night. Second, virtually no other publication ranks it so high.

From AtariAge:

Electric Escape Atari Archives (by Robert A. Jung) 65%
The Atari Times (by Gregory D. George) 60%
Game Zero Magazine (by Unknown) --
Justclaws JagSite (by Unknown) 60%
Video Game Critic (by David Mrozek) 65%



Average Score: 63%


6.3 out of 10... that's a score that I can agree with.

Jaguar and Cybermorph forgotten almost as soon as they came?!? YO! Jerk, here it is 14 years later and you are talking about BOTH!!!

Not only are you a troll, but a ignorant and stupid one too!


Such harsh name-calling over a video game review? Jerk, Troll, ignorant, stupid... Did someone once beat you up with a Cybermorph cart or something? A little bit of 'acting like an adult' would not be a bad thing, you know?

Now don't get me wrong that I'm a Cybermorph fanboy or that I think it's "all that" even compared to later Jaguar titles or it's sequel (which IS "all that"), but it deserves it's props in Jaguar and general gaming history. And no putz like you who most likely wasn't even there (I don't mean you weren't alive, but just that you were probably a SNES or Genesis fanboy at the time) at the Jag's or Cybermorph's release is going to be taken seriously with your half-wit opinions.


You're not a fanboy, but you managed to call me three more names and use your Ďpretendí defense again. Hmm... Ya, I donít believe you.

No console on its best day before the Jaguar could come close to what Cybermorph.
was doing. It had no competiton unless you want to include a decent PC(of that time.)


Or 3DO...

Perhaps we should start a thread called "Remembering Rev. Bob" how he
could not handle the fact that Cybermorph is enough proof alone that Jaguar
is superior to 32x.


Star Wars Arcade is much, much more graphically intensive than Cypermorph. More polygons, no draw distance problems. That argument is not based on fact, but fantasy.


32X cant do as detailed a game as Cybermorph.


Except a number of 32X games (Star Wars Arcade, DarXide, Virtua Racing Deluxe, and so on), are more detailed than Cybermorph.

By the way, what does all of this nitpicking have to do with Cybermorph anyways? Thatís not a rhetorical question, by the way, I expect an answer.

As a game it does not need to be compared to other games that came out many years later on 32X, Playstation, Saturn, or 3DO. It does not need to be compared to games of its own time. It merely needs to stand on its own merit as a game. When it does that, it's roughly a 6 out of 10, even this many years later. That's actually not too bad.

None of this nitpicking will also change the fact that unlike Battlemorph, which is an excellent game, Cybermorph suffers from dull and uninspired game play. It plays like a bonus level of a Sonic game (get the blue spheres, get the rings, et cetera). Fetching pods is not compelling game play. The lack of an ability to keep your progress is not immersive.

Funny how you employ a fallacy of logic to distract from facts about the game called Cybermorph by attacking a console called 32X that was released three years later. Once certainly has nothing to do with the other. Your non-defense of the game only exemplifies its inherent short comings.


owned....defending cybermorph is just hillarious. not to mention even trying to defend ultra vortek (aka ultra boring).

avp, tempest 2000, battlemorph yeah, but cybermorph? c'mon....

#47 Rev. Rob OFFLINE  

Rev. Rob

    Stargunner

  • Topic Starter
  • 1,251 posts
  • Reverend
  • Location:Phoenix, AZ

Posted Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:59 AM

Gunstar, Gorf, you two are absolutely beyond fanatical.

Claustraphobic levels?!? They are open and 360 degree, and larger than just about anything at the time.


The levels are itty bitty. The claustrophobia is further confounded by the fact that you're forced to fly through a maze of hills that you cannot fly over.

Short draw distance of polygons?!? All games at this time, that could even compare to Cybermorph suffered from the same thing.


That's really not an excuse. It causes the game to hold up poorly.

Enemies popping out of thin air?!? You can see the enemies at LEAST all the way to the edge of draw distance, which is far enough.


Not really.

Flight sim?!? If you think it's a flight sim, your dead wrong. It's not a similation AT ALL! It's a 3D shooter!


I didn't call it that.

Have you even played the game more than 5 minutes? I doubt it!


That's an interesting defense... ďpretend.Ē If you pretend that I havenít played Cybermorph, a game that Iíve owned for over a decade, does that alone make you right? Pretending?

Adequate tech demo?!? Diehard Gamefan crowned it GAME OF THE MONTH back in the day! And they said it shit all over StarFox at the time! I have the magazine that they wrote about a 7 PAGE review glorifying the game as the FUTURE!!!


But they were wrong, weren't they? First of all, I didn't review the game in 1993, I did it last night. Second, virtually no other publication ranks it so high.

From AtariAge:

Electric Escape Atari Archives (by Robert A. Jung) 65%
The Atari Times (by Gregory D. George) 60%
Game Zero Magazine (by Unknown) --
Justclaws JagSite (by Unknown) 60%
Video Game Critic (by David Mrozek) 65%



Average Score: 63%


6.3 out of 10... that's a score that I can agree with.

Jaguar and Cybermorph forgotten almost as soon as they came?!? YO! Jerk, here it is 14 years later and you are talking about BOTH!!!

Not only are you a troll, but a ignorant and stupid one too!


Such harsh name-calling over a video game review? Jerk, Troll, ignorant, stupid... Did someone once beat you up with a Cybermorph cart or something? A little bit of 'acting like an adult' would not be a bad thing, you know?

Now don't get me wrong that I'm a Cybermorph fanboy or that I think it's "all that" even compared to later Jaguar titles or it's sequel (which IS "all that"), but it deserves it's props in Jaguar and general gaming history. And no putz like you who most likely wasn't even there (I don't mean you weren't alive, but just that you were probably a SNES or Genesis fanboy at the time) at the Jag's or Cybermorph's release is going to be taken seriously with your half-wit opinions.


You're not a fanboy, but you managed to call me three more names and use your Ďpretendí defense again. Hmm... Ya, I donít believe you.

No console on its best day before the Jaguar could come close to what Cybermorph.
was doing. It had no competiton unless you want to include a decent PC(of that time.)


Or 3DO...

Perhaps we should start a thread called "Remembering Rev. Bob" how he
could not handle the fact that Cybermorph is enough proof alone that Jaguar
is superior to 32x.


Star Wars Arcade is much, much more graphically intensive than Cypermorph. More polygons, no draw distance problems. That argument is not based on fact, but fantasy.


32X cant do as detailed a game as Cybermorph.


Except a number of 32X games (Star Wars Arcade, DarXide, Virtua Racing Deluxe, and so on), are more detailed than Cybermorph.

By the way, what does all of this nitpicking have to do with Cybermorph anyways? Thatís not a rhetorical question, by the way, I expect an answer.

As a game it does not need to be compared to other games that came out many years later on 32X, Playstation, Saturn, or 3DO. It does not need to be compared to games of its own time. It merely needs to stand on its own merit as a game. When it does that, it's roughly a 6 out of 10, even this many years later. That's actually not too bad.

None of this nitpicking will also change the fact that unlike Battlemorph, which is an excellent game, Cybermorph suffers from dull and uninspired game play. It plays like a bonus level of a Sonic game (get the blue spheres, get the rings, et cetera). Fetching pods is not compelling game play. The lack of an ability to keep your progress is not immersive.

Funny how you employ a fallacy of logic to distract from facts about the game called Cybermorph by attacking a console called 32X that was released three years later. Once certainly has nothing to do with the other. Your non-defense of the game only exemplifies its inherent short comings.


owned....defending cybermorph is just hillarious. not to mention even trying to defend ultra vortek (aka ultra boring).

avp, tempest 2000, battlemorph yeah, but cybermorph? c'mon....


Thanks.

You know, I didn't think I was really that hard on the game. It certianly does have its place in history, and I find it to be a fun novelty. I played it for two hours before I wrote this, just as a refresher, and it's more enjoyable than not. Simply stated though, it's nowhere near stellar.

Edited by Rev. Rob, Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:00 AM.


#48 Sigurd OFFLINE  

Sigurd

    Moonsweeper

  • 250 posts
  • Location:Canada, BC

Posted Thu Jul 12, 2007 2:34 AM

Gunstar, Gorf, you two are absolutely beyond fanatical.

Claustraphobic levels?!? They are open and 360 degree, and larger than just about anything at the time.


The levels are itty bitty. The claustrophobia is further confounded by the fact that you're forced to fly through a maze of hills that you cannot fly over.

Short draw distance of polygons?!? All games at this time, that could even compare to Cybermorph suffered from the same thing.


That's really not an excuse. It causes the game to hold up poorly.

Enemies popping out of thin air?!? You can see the enemies at LEAST all the way to the edge of draw distance, which is far enough.


Not really.

Flight sim?!? If you think it's a flight sim, your dead wrong. It's not a similation AT ALL! It's a 3D shooter!


I didn't call it that.

Have you even played the game more than 5 minutes? I doubt it!


That's an interesting defense... ďpretend.Ē If you pretend that I havenít played Cybermorph, a game that Iíve owned for over a decade, does that alone make you right? Pretending?

Adequate tech demo?!? Diehard Gamefan crowned it GAME OF THE MONTH back in the day! And they said it shit all over StarFox at the time! I have the magazine that they wrote about a 7 PAGE review glorifying the game as the FUTURE!!!


But they were wrong, weren't they? First of all, I didn't review the game in 1993, I did it last night. Second, virtually no other publication ranks it so high.

From AtariAge:

Electric Escape Atari Archives (by Robert A. Jung) 65%
The Atari Times (by Gregory D. George) 60%
Game Zero Magazine (by Unknown) --
Justclaws JagSite (by Unknown) 60%
Video Game Critic (by David Mrozek) 65%



Average Score: 63%


6.3 out of 10... that's a score that I can agree with.

Jaguar and Cybermorph forgotten almost as soon as they came?!? YO! Jerk, here it is 14 years later and you are talking about BOTH!!!

Not only are you a troll, but a ignorant and stupid one too!


Such harsh name-calling over a video game review? Jerk, Troll, ignorant, stupid... Did someone once beat you up with a Cybermorph cart or something? A little bit of 'acting like an adult' would not be a bad thing, you know?

Now don't get me wrong that I'm a Cybermorph fanboy or that I think it's "all that" even compared to later Jaguar titles or it's sequel (which IS "all that"), but it deserves it's props in Jaguar and general gaming history. And no putz like you who most likely wasn't even there (I don't mean you weren't alive, but just that you were probably a SNES or Genesis fanboy at the time) at the Jag's or Cybermorph's release is going to be taken seriously with your half-wit opinions.


You're not a fanboy, but you managed to call me three more names and use your Ďpretendí defense again. Hmm... Ya, I donít believe you.

No console on its best day before the Jaguar could come close to what Cybermorph.
was doing. It had no competiton unless you want to include a decent PC(of that time.)


Or 3DO...

Perhaps we should start a thread called "Remembering Rev. Bob" how he
could not handle the fact that Cybermorph is enough proof alone that Jaguar
is superior to 32x.


Star Wars Arcade is much, much more graphically intensive than Cypermorph. More polygons, no draw distance problems. That argument is not based on fact, but fantasy.


32X cant do as detailed a game as Cybermorph.


Except a number of 32X games (Star Wars Arcade, DarXide, Virtua Racing Deluxe, and so on), are more detailed than Cybermorph.

By the way, what does all of this nitpicking have to do with Cybermorph anyways? Thatís not a rhetorical question, by the way, I expect an answer.

As a game it does not need to be compared to other games that came out many years later on 32X, Playstation, Saturn, or 3DO. It does not need to be compared to games of its own time. It merely needs to stand on its own merit as a game. When it does that, it's roughly a 6 out of 10, even this many years later. That's actually not too bad.

None of this nitpicking will also change the fact that unlike Battlemorph, which is an excellent game, Cybermorph suffers from dull and uninspired game play. It plays like a bonus level of a Sonic game (get the blue spheres, get the rings, et cetera). Fetching pods is not compelling game play. The lack of an ability to keep your progress is not immersive.

Funny how you employ a fallacy of logic to distract from facts about the game called Cybermorph by attacking a console called 32X that was released three years later. Once certainly has nothing to do with the other. Your non-defense of the game only exemplifies its inherent short comings.


owned....defending cybermorph is just hillarious. not to mention even trying to defend ultra vortek (aka ultra boring).

avp, tempest 2000, battlemorph yeah, but cybermorph? c'mon....


Thanks.

You know, I didn't think I was really that hard on the game. It certianly does have its place in history, and I find it to be a fun novelty. I played it for two hours before I wrote this, just as a refresher, and it's more enjoyable than not. Simply stated though, it's nowhere near stellar.


lol, look at you and your little buddy pattin each other on the back, for a post well trolled.
Anywho, to my point, I never defended the gameplay of Ultra Vortek, just spoke about it because of the statement that SF2 and MK2 on the SNES beat it graphically. I own both those games for the SNES, I am also a HUGE MK fan, and altho I myself enjoy the MK series more then anyother fighting game around, Ultra Vortek makes MK2 on the SNES look like crap, aswell as SF2 on the SNES.
I find you trying to defend that to be hilarious.

Now, why was this whole thread made? to stir the pot and dis Cybermorph? or did you actually want to try your hand at writting reviews and was hoping for some creative critiz'em?? :dunce: :rolling:

#49 A Sprite OFFLINE  

A Sprite

    Stargunner

  • 1,062 posts

Posted Thu Jul 12, 2007 3:37 AM

lol, look at you and your little buddy pattin each other on the back, for a post well trolled.


When did you stop beating your wife?

#50 Gorf OFFLINE  

Gorf

    River Patroller

  • 4,633 posts

Posted Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:35 AM

Even in the face of overwhelming evidence (which you ignore), you march on in defiance. Why is that?


What evidence might that be Rev? I've yet to see anything to back up your claims.
Your a troll. You do things like a troll does.Im not the first and only to point this out.




0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users