DimensionX

Well popmilo, it's the typical C64 colours that we all have seen so many times before. You can't really miss them, can you? Especially not light green and dark brown because they are way to dominant compared to the other colours in the palette. That's a shame because that makes them stands out in just about every game. Look at 100 different C64 games and you'll know what i'm talking about. Light green is the most dominant of them all. I watched a YT clip of the 100 best C64 games. My reaction was. Aaah, green, more green, that's green, there's green again. They could have been choosen the palette to be more neutral and equal. Green is always way to dominant, dark brown too. Try it yourself C64's biggest drawback is it's limited palette. Perhaps it makes C64 good at certain things, but not in the colour area for sure.

Yes, ugly as all hell, no horizontal scrolling, loses the whole beautiful simplicity of the C64 original. blehhh! Pete To work with some few spreads is perfect on the ST. That's why Bitmap Brothers games looks so good. imho it looks AWFUL. I know that you think so. Think about that for a while. Now i'm better log out for tonight.

Yes, ugly as all hell, no horizontal scrolling, loses the whole beautiful simplicity of the C64 original. blehhh! Pete To work with some few spreads is perfect on the ST. That's why Bitmap Brothers games looks so good.

A Paradroid fan? Seen the ST version? PNG, 984x1472px, 259 KB (0.25 MB)

Perhaps the best thing is to rework the graphics completly and forget about the orginal? Just to suit that particular computer? But keeping the gameplay intact. I think i would do that if i converted a game. Like... Ok, it's a C64 game, but i don't want it to look like a C64 game on the Atari. Now it shall look like an Atari game. And vice versa

It's something completly different when you see it on the emulator, then A8 has many rainbows to choose from. Many of them is in different shades, darker or lighter rainbow, gold and silver rainbows, and so on. The posted YT clip was truly horrible. A camera in front of a bad tv is a wild guess. Even the tv screen was clipping. I'm looking at that one you posted in the emu, it's vile. As I say, make some proper gradients not just 0-255 because that looks crap and is lazy and put those colours through the text not the whole background (I'd love to see what that does to a TV) and it'd look fine. Pete Agree, it's not the best place to put text that people shall read. That screen was a bit on the extreme. But most times people put rainbows where they don't interphere with the text.

It's something completly different when you see it on the emulator, then A8 has many rainbows to choose from. Many of them is in different shades, darker or lighter rainbow, gold and silver rainbows, and so on. The posted YT clip was truly horrible. A camera in front of a bad tv is a wild guess. Even the tv screen was clipping. Or the camera. It's when it you use a different frequency that happends.

Both look good attempts to create a unique machine specific experience inspired by something on better hardware. As such they're both interesting. personally i was more a fan of the sci-fi type games, hence subdued palettes even mostly greys are just fine. More movement as was possible on the C64 wins for me. =More gameplay possibilities. I agree 100% with what was said above - the fixed palette but more choice in where colors are, and how many different coloured blocks can move - was a highly effective compromise, and the C64 deserved its popularity. Shame about the C64's not-quite bright yellow. That was an odd colour. But on wikipedia they state they needed to re-use YUV values, some colours are just complements or something, forced by what they could fit on the chip. The big problem with the C64 palette is that some colours stands out to much, light green and dark brown.

This is more like it. I really hope that BP manages to fix that oil leak.

It feels like an uncomplete platform game. Why? You will have to focus on a few things and max them out because you can't have the rest to make the game complete. Exactly like they did in Mayhem in Monsterland. Crownland is a much more complete experience because they aimed the game for what's possible for an 8bit computer. Else it would have been recived the same review. To mimic more powerful hardware isn't always a good thing to do, because you will have to sacrifice a lot of things. I would rather have seen a more complete game with less max outs in just certain areas. But then the game wouldn't have been an initial wow factor like it was when it was released off course. And no, to be honest i don't liked the gameplay, to basic and too repetitive to be real fun.

Because it's very much missing that makes the game feels empty, that normally should have been there, and that's because it's on C64. The situation would have been exactly the same on A8, Spectrum, Amstrad and any other 8 bit computer. It's like creating a first person game for C64 or A8, it will not work. To make a typical Amiga platform game for C64 will not simply work because you will have to get rid of lots of things that normally should have been there. After the first "wow factor" you will miss a lot of stuff like more colours, layers of parallax, more animated sprites, better backgrounds etc.

Don't missunderstand me Pete. I wrote a honest review of Mayhem in Monsterland. Let me explain. Mayhem in Monsterland should have been on Amiga instead because it's too much missing that never can be added on a C64 or any other 8bit computer. That type of platform games needs better hardware to do them justice and to give you a descent gaming experience. Crownland feels mutch more possible because it's a game that will work fine on 8bit computers, it already looks very complete, but there's one thing left to do. The graphics is okey but the game needs longer levels and more playability to be a good game. If the creator adds more and longer levels, adds some new elements that gives the game more playability, we will see a good looking Mario clone for A8.

DimensionX honest review of Mayhem in Monsterland for C64 These types of games isn't for 8 bit computers. Let's begin... (not a real game review off course but some of my thoughts) This game is about to show off what a C64 is capable off, the funny thing is that is does the opposite. Shows what C64 isn't capable of. When i play this game i get a strong feeling of a machine who's trying to do something it really shouldn't have done from the beginning. This is definitely not what 8bit gaming is about. A game like this is more suited for a console like Megadrive or a computer like Amiga, who can handle a game like this. On C64 it just feels like some demogame to show off something that only shows that a game like this shouldn't be here from the beginning. You'll lack most things that should be here. A descent colour palette, more animation and layers of parallax scrolling. The gameplay is pretty much samish too. Simple forward/backward jumping in front of an empty background who should be filled with parallax layers, colours and animated objects. The whole game has a very empty feeling and is a long way from a real game who is built on this concept on more powerful machines. Unlike Crownland where gameplay stinks too and the levels is way to short to even be called a game, Crownland vary it's palette thoughout the game and that makes it feel like a more complete experience then Mayhem in Monsterland where the typical C64 palette feels just the same level after level. Crownland at least tries presents a different colour experience in the graphic area where Mayhem in Monsterland feels the same throught the whole game. I'm really sorry to say it as a 8bit game retro freak, but games like this isn't for the 8bit computers, they can't handle games like this by far and if you want to play descent games, try a more powerful machine who can give you a real experience instead. Like Snes, Megadrive or Amiga. Off course it's fun to see what can be done on an old computer, but you will just get something that pretends to be something on a more powerful machine and this isn't even close to a game on Amiga, Snes or Megadrive. Next time i want to review something that is made for an 8bit computer. Something that has 8bit graphics, 8bit gameplay and is fun to play. This doesn't not even feel like a game, i get a strong demo feeling trying to play Mayhem in Monsterland. A very empty feeling. The funny thing is that... The programmers obvisiosly tries to show what a C64 is capable of. The funny thing is that they actually do the opposite, this is a great exemple of what C64 isn't capable of. Reviewed by DimensionX May 2 2010

Aha, så hittade man en svensk tråd också. Jag har en retroblogg jag skriver i lite då och då. http://gamlaspel.wordpress.com/ Fairchild? Det var den första konsollen jag ägde.

If I thought you'd be honest about the C64 games then I'd be happy to hear the outcome.. Please don't put words into my mouth, I DID NOT SAY AND DID NOT MEAN the Atari is now "less good". If you were sensible and not just trying to win arguments you'd apply what I said to all the other 8bits as well. They're as good now as they were back then OR I suppose they're all less good to the same degree. Pete Thanks for that Pete. That means that these arguments are pretty unnessesary. The easiest way is to like all the old 8bit computers, like i and you do. I will give them a fair chance and then come back for a fast, honest personal review. Until them, have a good weekend Pete.

Please do go back, or is that it? If you remember, I specifically asked you NOT to use YT for Mayhem because it doesn't do it justice, this was BEFORE you looked at one video for about 10 seconds and made your decision on it and it's gameplay. I've never said "C64 is better than Atari 800", please find where I've done so or shut up I've never said all your screenshots are bad, I've commented on what you've claimed about them and how they compare to the C64. I've never said Atari is bad, I've said myself it's a great machine for it's time and that I'm here coding for it because I think so. Can you see a trend in my reply? You're either so involved in your own "Atari is better" world that you can't see what other people are saying or you're arguing with so many people (including Atarians) that you've no clue who you're replying to from one minute to the next most of the time. Pete Then it's time to set things right then? Good I will play the games using VICE and give them a fair chance. You said that Atari was a good computer for it's time? And that means that you're thinking it's less good now? I don't think so, Atari is still a great computer even if it's 30 years old. btw, i talked to Cray Chang via mail, the guy who made a couple of incredible playable games for the A8. Claimjumper, Dog Daze etc. One of my idols of that time. It must be a quite big library of games for A8 that never were released for any other computer to convert because A8 was released several years before C64. I have quite many A8 only games.

Shallow gameplay. I can see that from a miles distance as a veteran gamer. Karolina seems to be a sensible person. What counts, is gameplay. You can tell if a game is good or bad in just a minute. What matters is pure gameplay and replay value. Games like Crownland and Mayhem in Monsterland will never be any games for hall of fame. You have dissed my Atari shots and videos, now i have dissed yours. Back to square one. When you start to act honest and less C64 biased, i will too. Because i don't want to dislike any of the older computers. So I'm not a veteran gamer and I can't see what might be good? Ok, you're probably right, I'm a veteran gamer who actually PLAYS the games before making a decision. Dissing this and that is exactly the problem, you're dissing the C64 ones with nonsense, any dissing done by me or others disagreeing with you is based on your misunderstanding of what is technically happening in them when you say "C64 can't do this". I am obviously more honest than you, you've repeatedly lied about not continuing this stupid stuff and eeeeevery day you start it up again. ANYTHING anyone posts that's not Atari, you just dismiss, that's not very honest is it? I have no C64 bias, I have C64 KNOWLEDGE, something you're lacking so I'm less biased than you because I know what's going on. If you go back and read the thread you'll see most of us have never said anything like C64 is better than Atari, just C64 CAN do things you seem to think it can't. Pete If we go back and read all postings, we are gonna see something that you're not going to like. The palette isn't right. It's bad quality on the YT video. Excuses, excuses and excuses. C64 is so much better. All screenshots i post...are bad. Several of you are terrible biased when you discuss. C'mon, Atari isn't that bad. It's a great computer even if it's 30 years old. And so is C64.

Shallow gameplay. I can see that from a miles distance as a veteran gamer. Karolina seems to be a sensible person. What counts, is gameplay. You can tell if a game is good or bad in just a minute. What matters is pure gameplay and replay value. Games like Crownland and Mayhem in Monsterland will never be any games for hall of fame. You have dissed my Atari shots and videos, now i have dissed yours. Back to square one. When you start to act honest and less C64 biased, i will too. Because i don't want to dislike any of the older computers.

Is that why they got max score in the gaming magz? (is my reply) You mean like Mayhem in Monsterland did? Pete In gameplay? No way. Either the reviewer must have been drunk, or a complete beginner. To play a good game in the genre, try Sonic or Chuck Rock II for Genesis. They are fun for real. In fact i still think that Sonic II is the best platformer ever made. If i want a good C64 platformer, i choose Dynamite Dan. Some comments... It looks lovely and plays well, but like Karolina, I found it to be lacking something. Maybe it's the OTT reaction folk have had to it that makes me irrationally dislike it a wee bit. Karolina - 2010-04-03 I don't know how to comment on this without sounding mean, but I was really disappointed by the shallow gameplay. Who cares about the graphics. http://www.lemon64.com/?mainurl=http%3A//www.lemon64.com/games/details.php%3FID%3D1625

Is that why they got max score in the gaming magz? (is my reply)

What? They're games, you can't tell from a video if they're playable or not. To me most of what you've posted over the last few days LOOKS boring but I woudln't judge them as such without playing them to find out for ourselves. Pete Dynamite Dan looks fun. So does R-Type. These looked like homemade demos turned into games like so many other i have seen on both A8 and Atari ST. I will play them on VICE. But i already know that they are incredible boring. Try Deadland on the ST, good looking Gods clone, very boring.

I never said that Crownland was playable, and it isn't. You asked for comparisons for Crownland from the C64, therefore your points are remarks on that request. If you're now going to say crownland isn't playable, why list that on each C64 game? *edit* Also, how do you judge the playability of a game from a YT video? Pete Because they aren't playable either. Just demos to show off something. A fun game at least looks fun. These looked real boring, as Crownland. For playability try Dynamite Dan.

I never said that Crownland was playable, and it isn't.

Each level in Mayhem has two states, first 'sad' (all grey and miserable), then 'happy' (bright and colourful). The video you linked to above was a level in sad mode. Happy mode looks like this: It's Magic 2 is another one to check out: and Flimbo's Quest has some nice parallax scrolling: To see something like the A8, but way better, watch the c64 in action. It's just my opinion! Let's hope for more new fantastic games for both Atari and C64 in the future. Remember, the only thing that matters is to make or play a good game. At last...it's my turn to comment. What we are watching in the first game is (to be a bit sarcastic) 1.Lack of parallax 2.C64's typical green 3.Big objects with lack of any clear colour (bad youtube clip?) 4.And, where's the playability? In the other game 1.A static black mountain 2.Clouds to save processor power instead of to parallax the whole screen 3.C64's typical green again 4.Lack of any clear colours (bad quality of the yt clip?) 5.Sadly it seems to be lack of any playability too. And...Flimbo looks messy. I guess it's because of a real bad YT clip? No, i'm not impressed...not yet. In fact, i even more impressed by this game, on a completly different computer. Here is, good graphics, playability and replayvalue. And this (second after batman) (i like 3D isometric games) Here we find good clear graphics, playability and replay value. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWKL9rpDZv4 And what impresses me most of all, is this, because of great playability and replay value for the latest 27 years. Unfortanly they never released it for the 5200 console. I can play this game anytime. In fact, i played it an hour ago.

No hard feelings Bryan. Thanks for your info.