LutzfromOz Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 Games like Narc and Terminator 2 the arcade game are notorious coin swallowers. I have seen these games that i swear are impossible to beat, beaten on youtube. but then again it might have been dip switches altered so difficulty was toned down. as much as i like smash tv it is a hard game, id almost consider it to be a coin swallower but ive seen it beaten on 4 credits. Its a shame about Narc, i like it on the first 5 screens but then it gets ridiculous, id like to see a fan remake or spiritual successor to it. any bad "Coin Swallower" games i should know about id love to hear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempest Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 Any shooter of that time like Revolution X falls into this category as do games that had constantly decreasing health like Gauntlet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inky Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 I give Terminator 2 a pass, as it's telling a story, plus the game was fun. Revolution X, on the other hand, seems to have been designed for no other reason than to suck quarters.Listen to episode 24 of the Pie Factory Podcast as we interview Brian Colin, creator of Rampage and Xenophobe, and we talk about this particular issue at one point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LutzfromOz Posted February 24, 2017 Author Share Posted February 24, 2017 T2 was fun but the home console ports i hated Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LutzfromOz Posted February 24, 2017 Author Share Posted February 24, 2017 I always considered myself good at playing mortal kombat 2 on the super nes, but playing it at the arcade is hard, like a lot more difficult than on console, then again depends on the machines dip switch setting 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cynicaster Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 As soon as the multiplayer, "insert coin to continue" paradigm took over, I'd argue that the number of titles falling under this category would be pretty close to 100%. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerx Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 As soon as the multiplayer, "insert coin to continue" paradigm took over, I'd argue that the number of titles falling under this category would be pretty close to 100%. Yep. Stuff like TMNT pretty much marks that K-T boundary layer for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4ever2600 Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 No one's mentioned all laserdisc games, i.e. Dragons Lair, Space Ace, Cliff Hanger etc? There's my money takers... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+save2600 Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 No one's mentioned all laserdisc games, i.e. Dragons Lair, Space Ace, Cliff Hanger etc? There's my money takers... True, but you don't (rarely ever) see those laserdisc games out anywhere anymore. Besides those already mentioned, I immediately thought of the Neo*Geo. Shooters and beat 'em ups especially. Hell, even Baseball Stars BITD had me reaching for more quarters to buy more innings. Or League Bowling for more frames. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanooki Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 Pretty much like 1/2 the library of Neo-Geo arcade games are. Taking the home editions out of the equation here of course. If you had to just walk up and try and learn any of the 'flight' shooters or any of the run and gun(metal slug, cyber lip) or adventure titles (top hunter, spin master, blues journey), as well as those first person adventures (Crossed Swords/Super Spy) you are going to die a LOT. Each shot is a quarter and you probably should expect to lose quite a few dollars worth of quarters just to finish them. Not to get any good at it, just to finish. Multiply by magnitudes the amount of dollars in quarters if you want to rack up any meaningful bonuses or save those POWs in any of the MS titles. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ransom Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 Gauntlet certainly ate a lot of my tokens and quarters! "The warrior needs food badly!" "The valkyrie is about to die!" That was the only one of those coin gobblers I played very much. The others never attracted me enough to make it seem worthwhile. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+GoldLeader Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 It's crazy to think that all these games were at one point designed to take our money...I think as a kid, I put that out of my mind. From what I heard in the old days, a game was supposed to last "about" 3 minutes. But I do know where you're coming from...Even as they were designed to take our money, Many good games seemed to have been made because they were trying to create a good game, not just get your cash. I can remember when "continues" were a brand new feature... To answer the question, I just agree with everyone else above. FWIW, I once went to an arcade in the '90s that was one of those pay $10 to get in places, and then all the games were set on free play. And I really enjoyed one aspect of 2 player games. The wait in line not withstanding, they had the Fighting games and Racing games set up so if you won the fight, or won the race, you kept playing, while the loser had to leave. So once you got up there, it was based on your skill against other players...Playing games that way in general negates some of the quarter munching tendencies... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cynicaster Posted March 9, 2017 Share Posted March 9, 2017 It's crazy to think that all these games were at one point designed to take our money...I think as a kid, I put that out of my mind. From what I heard in the old days, a game was supposed to last "about" 3 minutes. Me too... my "prime" arcade years were right in the midst of the multiplayer coin sucker era, yet that certainly did not deter me from lusting after those games. The "wow factor" those games had relative to what we had available to play at home was just so large that we were blinded to what was going on. But 10+ years later, when I started messing around with MAME, I distinctly remember one day playing one of those games... was probably TMNT or similar... and I noticed I was just mashing the credit button like crazy to get past certain bosses and crazy parts of the game. At that moment, as an adult, I was able to look at it in a much different light; it was crystal clear that the game wasn't just "difficult," but purposefully designed to completely fleece youngsters of their paper route money. Apologists for those kinds of games will always point out that the golden age games were no different in this respect--i.e., unfair difficulty to steal your money--but I just don't agree. I find that with most of the best golden age classics, you can actually develop enough skill at the game to overcome its difficulty somewhat. Prime examples are DK and Robotron. In those games, your first credit might last 30 seconds, but if you keep at it and practice, you can get to a point where you exceed the "design target" of 3 minutes several times over. And in those games, if you do get that good, it's pure skill as opposed to just memorization of patterns or memorization of exactly where/when certain enemies appear. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.