Adventure II Main Character Poll

[+Cafeman]

My spies tell me there were a few adamant Square (not that Japanese company, the main character in Adventure 1!) supporters at NAVA. And several at here at Atari Age have opinions on the matter too.

 

So here's a poll.

 

The Question: In the sequel to the Atari 2600 game Adventure, what should the main character/protagonist/hero look like on the Atari 5200?

 

If you never played Adventure on the Atari 2600 -- SHAME ON YOU! Go download it for use on a 2600 emulator!

 

Note that nothing about Adventure2 has been cast into stone by Alan & myself yet. Your opinion matters to us! It seems that I can't easily do a Poll here on the forum so here are the choices:

 

 

(a) A Square!

(b) A detailed sprite (like Elf or Knight)

© Another geometric shape (Circle, Triangle)

(d) You really don't care either way.

(e) Another -- please specify!!

 

[ 10-21-2001: Message edited by: Cafeman ]

[J2383]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cafeman:

The Question:

In the sequel to the Atari 2600 game Adventure, what should the main character/protagonist/hero look like on the Atari 5200?

 

Note that nothing about Adventure2 has been cast into stone by Alan & myself yet. Your opinion matters to us! It seems that I can't easily do a Poll here on the forum so here are the choices:

 

 

(a)

A Square!

(b)

A detailed sprite (like Elf or Knight)

©

Another geometric shape (Circle, Triangle)

(d)

You really don't care either way.

(e)

Another -- please specify!!

 

[ 10-21-2001: Message edited by: Cafeman ]

---

 

 

I Say it should look something like the original Sqaure but uh with Detail like a Square Elven Thing I could do something like this for you or just about any other graphic

graphic for you I would LOVE to help you with this I can show you my work if you want Just mail me at J2383@hotmail.com Please

[Bob Mackey]

I vote square. But you could make the square slightly 3D looking, if you like, perhaps by making it's lower edge darker (or lighter) if you understand. But just a simple square would do fine. Besides, you'll want to save your sprites for other objects and creatures. By the way, are the dragons going to be more than one sprite in width? You could make each dragon two sprites to give them more detail, though this may lead to flicker. But then, the original flickered a lot too.

[Rhindle The Red]

I vote for my old nemesis, the square.

 

But I don't mind the idea that was bandied about earlier of letting the player choose a sprite and having the square be one of the choices.

 

But if there's only room for one, I think it should be the square.

[Genki]

Be square or else.

[+Mitch]

My vote goes to the blockhead.... err square.

 

Mitch

http://atari7800.atari.org

[Ze_ro]

I guess I have to be the jerk and say that a square would suck. I mean, if we're going to have a fancy 5200 version of the game, why are we going to cripple it in the name of nostalgia? If you want the original Adventure, then play the 2600 version. Atari has always struggled against more graphical consoles out there like the ColecoVision and Nintendo, and usually lost. Why are we just admitting defeat when we have the potential to have a game that blows the pants off the ColecoVision? (And this is coming from a ColecoVision fan).

 

So, I vote for B. Though it really doesn't have to be that detailed. I agree with the fact that old video games make you imagine more stuff, so the sprite shouldn't be too obvious. That way people can think it's a man or woman, or an elf or knight or whatever, y'know? Check the graphics in the Ultima games and you'll see what I mean. One of the guys here even has one of them for his Avatar... something like that would be great in my opinion.

 

However, I do think that there should be some sort of option or hidden secret that will let you play as a square.... or perhaps a hidden area of the maze that looks like the original Adventure (Anyone seen the Rogue level in Nethack?)

 

So what's the score, 4 vs 2 now? I'm expecting to lose this argument... but I can't just sit idle while a great idea for a game gets poor graphics on purpose. (I mean hell, that castle looked awesome!)

 

--Zero

[Albert]

I don't think a square should be used either, but the issue isn't terribly important to me. The only reason to use it would be to pay homage to the original 2600 version. But the 2600 version was not popular nor was it a good game because the player was a square. The player was a square because of the 2600's rather limited graphics capabilities. What made Adventure fun was the gameplay.

 

Sure, you could quite easily make the player a square. But this will only serve to confuse people who may never have played the original game, especially when that square is drawn against screens such as the wonderful castle in the screenshot we've been treated to.

 

An alternative that I haven't heard yet is to give the player a *choice*. One of these choices can be a square, another can be a humanoid character, another could be a robot for all I care. However, I think too much time is being spent debating how the character should look. The most important thing about the game is the gameplay (repeat this over and over). As long as the game is fun, I could care less what the player looks like, as long as I can see him.

 

..Al

[Abraxascarab]

Cube or Square. Choice sounds good too.

[god-zilla]

putting a block in with graphics like I see

for adventure 2 would be beyond insulting,

and pointless. Great way to help reduce the

appeal of your game to only a sad few.

 

But I do agree that it should be something symbolic instead of your standard little dude.

 

I think a nicely drawn Knights Helm would do the trick, and still give the game something

of a unique look.

[J2383]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Atari-Jess:

erm... yeah

but I want a guy but I want the ability to be the square in it somewhere cause you HAVE to be a square but i think it should be an option, it would please all i think

---

 

 

WAIT STOP THE PRESSES I GOT IT!!! How bout you give the player the choice in the game?:-) how bout that?

 

[ 10-22-2001: Message edited by: J2383 ]

[Hakogame 箱亀]

well, god-zilla, digital presse's opinions seem to indicate that you're one of the sad few instead of the square lovers.

[NE146]

I have to say that although I started out by saying keep it a square.. I actually wouldn't have any objections to an icon symbol such as a Knights helmet like Godzilla suggested above.

 

i.e. I don't like the idea of an animated character.. But an ICON of something (cross/helmet/etc.) I think would work fine and keep the spirit of the characters gameplay movement and actions etc.

 

Or.. of course, how hard could it be to offer a choice

[Tizoc]

I'm gonna have to go against the majority here and say, "(b) A detailed sprite (like Elf or Knight)".

 

If this was a 2600 version I could see the square, but this is a 5200 version. I remember the fun thing about getting the 5200 games was the updated graphics. Or else what was the point? I just can't see a square on the beatifully detailed castle.

 

Leave the square for the 2600.

[Inky]

I say keep it a square. Yes, this is a 5200 game, but everything else is getting spruced up. Leave the main character a square as a 'homage' to the original.

[Atari-Jess]

Orange!

[Atari-Jess]

erm... yeah

but I want a guy but I want the ability to be the square in it somewhere cause you HAVE to be a square but i think it should be an option, it would please all i think

[Fourth Horseman]

I vote for a detailed sprite. Let's show off the increased graphics power of the 5200.

 

- FH -

[Jetboot Jack]

If this were back in the day and a real ATARI release they would have made the main character a detailed as possible.

 

Make the main character a detailed one, homage is one thing, but the square in the 2600 version was a pure technical limitation!

 

The 5200 deserves to shine!!!!

[god-zilla]

I think its obvious, even from swordquest

(originally atari's own sequel to adventure,) that they themselves, even on the 2600, didn't want a square anymore. I think we should stay true to the wisdom of the fuji and banish the square to his time period.

 

And I see I'm NOT one of the few.

 

Z

[mos6507]

I guess I'm a luddite but I think the more emphasis that gets placed on making graphics decisions in this game the more likely it's going to look great and play like crap.

 

I think being hung up on the look is really the opposite approach that should be taken to designing this game, and it PERFECTLY illustrates why the 2600 was such a great console, because it virtually eliminated the ability to create good looking but poorly playing games.

 

A sequel should offer much more than better graphics. And it certainly shouldn't sacrifice anything that made the original great either.

 

Take Star Raiders II for instance. I know it wasn't conceived as such, but when compared against the original there was too much lost and not enough gained to consider it a real advance vs. the 8K original. It was mostly a cosmetic improvement.

 

Then take a 2600 sequel like Frogger II. That game introduced the jumping aspect of the gameplay and is a true improvement in offering a new gameplay element.

 

So I would stick with bland graphics and focus on the underlying gameplay first, then skin the game's graphics.

[Abraxascarab]

I agree completely with Glen. Upon thinking about this more, I think a cube is a good compromise. It adds a 3D look and is better than a square. But also, if the character was an elf, or a dwarf, or a human, or an orc, or a petunia, you are going to leave a lot of people disenchanted. It's hard to imagine your character as somthing greater when the design has already been chosen for you. A cube is a generic token and you can imagine you are just about any critter that moves. (I imagined I was a knight in the original game.) But more importantly, the bland character didn't matter at all, the game play was what was important. I'm a firm beliver that the less emphasis given to graphics is all the more time to program better game play. (Keep It Simple)

[StanJr]

If it were 2600, then I'd say square or bust, baby! In my mind, if I'm not a big mono-colored square, then it ain't Adventure.

 

But seeing as to how this is 5200, you really should use something more detailed. The square would just be out of place in world of such richer graphics.

[Nostalgic]

My vote is to allow the player the choice of how he or she is to be represented - flat square, cube, humanoid figure, AtariAge avatar ...

 

A few games from the olden days offered this possibility - Ghost Manor, EA's Gladiator, EA's M.U.L.E., and Gauntlet all come to mind.

 

Although this would deviate from the original spirit of the game, perhaps the player could transform between shapes during play, needing to find objects to "learn" how to transform. This is a bit of a reach, though...

[Fourth Horseman]

I know this has been brought up before, but doesn't a square or cube sorta clash with those beautiful castle graphics? I can only assume that the rest of the game will be equally as impressive visually.

 

Just my call, but a square or cube would seem really out of place to me. *shrug*

 

- FH -