What do you think of Video Game Critic’s scores for 7800 games?

[Inky]

15 hours ago, 7800JAGFAN said:

I always feel I have to defend Desert Falcon,  is it a zaxxon clone?  in that sense is Raiden just a Xevious clone then?  I think Desert Falcon is better with more strategy than zaxxon and matches it graphically.  Also it is a game the NES could not handle, all those enemies at once.   I put right at the top with the best 7800 games. 

I have no problem with clone games. Blatant rip offs, of which Desert Falcon is NOT, are another story.

 

My main issue with Desert Falcon isn't the landing or swimming, it's the randomness of how the enemies behave, with the poor collision detection. It's difficult to tell if you're in the right place to shoot an enemy, or to avoid it. It makes no sense also that if you touch a pyramid while walking on the ground that you die.  Are they electrified, ala Berzerk? I'm not a fan of the seemingly fuzzy graphics, but if a game is fun, I'm willing to overlook that.

The thing in the game I like the most is the battle with the sphinx.

[Giles N]

Ninja Golf got a C- 

 

Come on, its at absolute worst B-, I rank it as A.

 

And then by what I would think of as ‘objective’ criterions.

 

Graphics: 9/10

Sound: 6,5/10

Playability: 9,5/10 

Lastability: 8/10

Amusementability: 8,5/10

 

Total (incl. proper intergration of chosen elements): 9/10

[Giles N]

And ‘Planet Smashers’ got actually an ‘F’.

 

F = do not(!) play or buy; waste of time and money + never fun.

 

Now, Planet Smashers may feel very generic; a run-of-the-mill shoot-em-up with a few strategical choices thrown in.

 

But ‘F’, no way.

 

A generic shooter that has just lot of alright elements with crisp, responsive controls, would logically land between D and C.

 

Not ‘F’.

Edited September 19, 2019 by Giles N

[Giles N]

Robotron 2084 got a C-.

 

I play it with only one control; even then I’d say B- (at worst)

 

It has just a ton of things going on, plethora of action and highly responsive controls.

 

Not C-.

Edited September 19, 2019 by Giles N

[BydoEmpire]

On 9/18/2019 at 2:59 PM, Inky said:

I have no problem with clone games. Blatant rip offs, of which Desert Falcon is NOT, are another story.

 

My main issue with Desert Falcon isn't the landing or swimming, it's the randomness of how the enemies behave, with the poor collision detection. It's difficult to tell if you're in the right place to shoot an enemy, or to avoid it. 

I totally agree. I like Desert Falcon, it's a decent game.  It's not great, imho, due to thsi factor.

[Geoff Oltmans]

The Robotron, Dig Dug, Planet Smashers, Tower Toppler, Ballblazer, Karateka.... all of these are way too low. 

 

[Lost Dragon]

21 hours ago, BydoEmpire said:

I totally agree. I like Desert Falcon, it's a decent game.  It's not great, imho, due to thsi factor.

As a stand alone title, it's fine, it has it's fans and anything that gets some good old fashioned debate going, can only be a good thing ☺.

 

 

It just suffers from the classic post 2600 Atari Console syndrome:

 

It's a game that is not original, not exclusive to that platform, just better than versions avaiable on the Atari 8 bit home computer and 2600 console and because the 7800 lacks the sheer variety of titles the NES and Master System had to call on, it's always going to feature in articles looking at what games you should try on the 7800.

 

 

Thing for myself is. .unlike back then when you had only 1 console or computer in your house (had to sell existing system to convince folks to but you something newer etc ?) you can happily play countless takes on Zaxxon on numerous 8 bit machines wit realities ease, espically if your happy with emulation,  so Desert Falcon just struggles to justify play time.

 

It's not a bad game, it's just there are better alternative titles out there for many of us.

[Lost Dragon]

On 9/19/2019 at 4:10 AM, Giles N said:

And ‘Planet Smashers’ got actually an ‘F’.

 

F = do not(!) play or buy; waste of time and money + never fun.

 

Now, Planet Smashers may feel very generic; a run-of-the-mill shoot-em-up with a few strategical choices thrown in.

 

But ‘F’, no way.

 

A generic shooter that has just lot of alright elements with crisp, responsive controls, would logically land between D and C.

 

Not ‘F’.

That score surprised me.

 

I'd personally rather play something like Mega Apocalypse on C64 or even Crazy Comets. .but it's not an F.

[Lost Dragon]

22 minutes ago, Geoff Oltmans said:

The Robotron, Dig Dug, Planet Smashers, Tower Toppler, Ballblazer, Karateka.... all of these are way too low. 

 

Tower Toppler or Nebulus as i knew it on C64 and ST..fantastic rotation coding routine, but far too frustrating a game to enjoy on any platform. 

 

 

Ballblazer. .had on A8 and later C64.

 

A8 version is the definitive home micro version but it kinda falls into the showcase for Atari hardware , but not my bag, camp for myself.

 

But 7800 version shows hardwares strengths over NES in this field.

 

Robotron and Dig Dug scores caught me unaware.

 

7800 versions are fantastic. 

[Redjac]

On 9/16/2019 at 2:09 PM, King Atari said:

My only real head-scratcher is his review for Commando; he seems to like it well enough, but then you go to his review of the NES version, and while he knocks it around a bit more, he also considers it superior to the 7800 port. I can't wrap my mind around that - the NES version may be brighter, but the 7800 port is just so superior in every other facet that, yeah, I don't get it.

I think his reviews are about right, for both versions. Aside from the seizure inducing flickering, it's pretty easy to argue that the NES version is, in fact, superior. The background graphics and sprites all appear to be higher resolution. The NES version could possibly have avoided the flicker, too, if it was as slow as the 7800 port and only displayed a few enemies at a time, as the 7800 port does. The game is so easy you can just about point your joystick up and walk all the way to the end of the first stage without even firing a shot. Plus, the NES has the additional bunker stages.

 

I'm not saying the NES version is better than the 7800. I'm just saying the argument could be made, and probably has been made, a billion times. For me, that flickering is so bad that it cancels all the positives of the NES port, and I like that the 7800 version is so easy. Commando is hard.

Edited September 20, 2019 by Redjac

[King Atari]

4 hours ago, Redjac said:

I think his reviews are about right, for both versions. Aside from the seizure inducing flickering, it's pretty easy to argue that the NES version is, in fact, superior. The background graphics and sprites all appear to be higher resolution. The NES version could possibly have avoided the flicker, too, if it was as slow as the 7800 port and only displayed a few enemies at a time, as the 7800 port does. The game is so easy you can just about point your joystick up and walk all the way to the end of the first stage without even firing a shot. Plus, the NES has the additional bunker stages.

 

I'm not saying the NES version is better than the 7800. I'm just saying the argument could be made, and probably has been made, a billion times. For me, that flickering is so bad that it cancels all the positives of the NES port, and I like that the 7800 version is so easy. Commando is hard.

First off, bear in mind that I *like* the NES port of Commando; for all of its faults, it has remained one of my go-to vertical run-and-gunners on the console. But, I simply can't see how "it's pretty easy to argue that the NES version is, in fact, superior" to the 7800 version. The NES port might throw more enemies at you, but it's also a buggy flicker-fest. It may run a bit faster, but it's not exactly like the 7800 is slogging through mud the whole way through. Indeed, I've never even remotely considered the pace of the 7800 version to be an issue. And as for the challenge, the 7800 version certainly becomes easier once you pick up the machine gun and knife icons - but those are things the NES version should have had as well, but didn't. (The NES version does feature some different, additional bonus items that you can pick up, which is nice - except the bugginess often makes them disappear before you can actually reach some of them!) Also, the 7800 allows you to adjust the level of difficulty; the NES version doesn't, and doesn't really put up much challenge until the second go-round.

Graphically, I just can't see how someone could consider the NES port to be better, at least not objectively. The resolution might be higher on the NES, but the 7800 version displays a level of richness and depth and detail that the NES simply doesn't. As I said before, the NES is certainly brighter; it looks more like a desert-setting than the 7800's forest-like aura. Is that enough to consider it better than the 7800 though? I certainly don't think so. Atari games in general tended to be chunkier when compared to competing versions, but unless someone is just completely and utterly put off by that, I don't see how someone could say the 7800 looks worse than the NES here. (Images courtesy of MobyGames.)

7800:                                                       NES:

 

 






And sonically, forget it; there's no comparison between the two. The 7800 sounds far superior.

Honestly, the biggest knock against 7800 Commando isn't even something that's a fault on the game's part: the stock U.S. controller. That may have been a very real issue back in the day (in the States, anyway), but it's far less of one nowadays. Indeed, with a Euro joypad, it plays like a dream, and I can only imagine it plays even better with an Edladdin joystick or Genesis controller adapter.

Look, I'm no kool-aid drinker; for as much as I love the 7800, even I have to admit that versions of the same game tended to be better on the NES. There were a few exceptions though, and I absolutely feel Commando is one of them. IMO it's one that's definitely in need of a VGC re-review.

And by the way, the 7800 port features the underground bunkers, too. You don't have to watch very long in this video to see one. Like the rest of the game, it looks and sounds way better than the NES port, and includes some additional challenge in rolling boulders, as well.

Edited September 20, 2019 by King Atari

[Giles N]

There are dungeons/bonus stages in Commando

for the 7800.

[BassGuitari]

I think he's in the ballpark on most of them. I vary a bit on a few, though:

 

Asteroids: I'd go more like B+/A- on this one instead of A+. It's very well done but hardly knocks my socks off the way I'd expect an A+ title to.

Dark Chambers: D?! GTFO. Solid B for me--good game but it does get monotonous and your mind tends to insert the sound of crickets where background music/sounds should be.

Desert Falcon: I dunno, I like it alright. The action is pretty satisfying and I like the powerup system. I give it a B. *shrug*

Fatal Run: D seems a little harsh; I'd go more like C/C+.

Motorpsycho: VGC's salty that this game isn't Road Rash; it's an okay Hang-On type game but nothing special. C.

Planet Smashers: F?! Um, no. While this one certainly has that signature Atari Corp. blend of generic and cheap, it's pretty fun anyway. Desperately needs BGM/FX. C+.

Pole Position II: In the context of late '80s pack-in titles, yeah, this one's a little weak and behind the times compared to SMB/Duck Hunt, but I think VCG is missing the bigger picture here, which is that it's a pretty solid entry (by 7800 standards) in a genre that's a bit underrepresented on the platform. B-.

Xenophobe: No way in hell is this an "F" game, maybe unless you're an arcade purist, or the Lynx version ruined all other ports for you. Music, please! B.

Xevious: I agree that the graphics are a little on the bland side, which is about the only thing that keeps this title out of "A" territory for me. B+.

 

[Lost Dragon]

I grew up seeing Xenophobe splitting reviewers down the middle, from the moment the Arcade version was reviewed.

 

For some reviewers it was simply too tedious and shallow,others loved it.

 

The Commodore 64 version suffered somewhat from Chunky Graphics and Slow Controls and despite playing it on there and later the ST, it wasn't until the Lynx version that i could really appreciate the game.

 

I often dip into the game on the PSP, but the 7800 version simply joins the list of home versions i personally wouldn't invest time on as there are far better versions available,  but he didn't appear a fan of the game, period.

 

A more polished conversion to the 7800 might of pulled the score into a D but not higher was the impression i took away from his review, he just didn't take to the rather tedious at times gameplay.

 

That's always a risk with straight coin op conversions.

 

But for all it's flaws, giving the 7800 version an F seemed rather harsh.

 

It's by no means a disaster.

[+save2600]

To me, Xenophobe (any version) is kind of like AvP for the Jaguar... in that they're two games that *should* be more fun to play than they really are. Same with Rampage. The concept of exploring a space station or wrecking buildings sounds awesome, but there's just that certain "something" that's ultimately missing. 

 

On the the flip side, games like the Alien Breed series seem to have captured that certain special something well enough... and most of them just use the good 'ol top down perspective.

[Lost Dragon]

On 9/19/2019 at 4:03 AM, Giles N said:

Ninja Golf got a C- 

 

Come on, its at absolute worst B-, I rank it as A.

 

And then by what I would think of as ‘objective’ criterions.

 

Graphics: 9/10

Sound: 6,5/10

Playability: 9,5/10 

Lastability: 8/10

Amusementability: 8,5/10

 

Total (incl. proper intergration of chosen elements): 9/10

Looking at his reviews, i tend to find the scores sometimes seem harsher than the actual review text seems to suggest.

 

 

Ninja Golf not the harshest review out there..this was worse:

 

http://www.digitpress.com/reviews/ninjagolf.htm

 

I'm not a Golf fan, so the game would be totally lost on myself, but i am kinda left thinking his reviews might be better off ditching the score aspect and just having the review text.

 

[Giles N]

5 hours ago, Lost Dragon said:

Looking at his reviews, i tend to find the scores sometimes seem harsher than the actual review text seems to suggest.

 

 

Ninja Golf not the harshest review out there..this was worse:

 

http://www.digitpress.com/reviews/ninjagolf.htm

 

I'm not a Golf fan, so the game would be totally lost on myself, but i am kinda left thinking his reviews might be better off ditching the score aspect and just having the review text.

 

Not a golf-fan:

The way I see it, the golf-element is hardly about golfing, but a comedy-element poking fun at the life-and-death-honor-at-all-costs-thing in 80ies Ninja-games and movies...

 

If you loose... you dishonor yourself and your family... to the point where the only way to make up for it is ...

 

... harakiri...?

 

... nope; to try again...

 

Ninja training is a serious matter!

 

?

 

Moreover, when you come to the golf-hole, the ‘putting’ is done by throwing shurikens at a flying dragon...

 

Hmm... not usual in common golf methinks...

 

To me Ninja-Golf is not so much about ‘sports’ as ‘comedy’

 

Its an action-comedy game...

Edited September 21, 2019 by Giles N

[Lost Dragon]

Yeah it's in the same type of category as say Lynx Kung Food (another title that has it fans, but has seen some very poor reviews),  it's a comedy take on established games.

 

My point about not being a golf fan:

 

Reviews are subjective to start with,so i would be the worst person to review Leaderboard on C64 etc,but looking at the Digital Press review,which rated Ninja Golf lower still than the Video Game Critic, reviewer seemed to feel by trying to do a surreal take on 2 genres, it fell short on both.

Reviewers sometimes say games like Ninja Golf fall between 2 stools and once the novelty wears off,your left looking for something a bit deeper.

 

But they should also take into consideration games like Ninja Golf are perhaps designed for people like myself who wouldn't normally touch a serious Golf game,but make it pure escapism and we might well be tempted?

Edited September 22, 2019 by Lost Dragon

[Trebor]

Defunct Games gave Ninja Golf an A-, in which the reviewer falls more under where many do in seeing it as one of the best on the system.  This section of their review nails it for me:

 

"I started playing and had an absolute blast! Both elements of the game work great. The golf course is laid out well, and some golf standards still apply like how you lose distance when shooting out of a bunker. The side-scrolling beat-em-up works great, too. While low-lying enemies like gophers and cobras can get a cheap hit here and there, the fighting is overall very solid, though it is also very tough. You even get bonus points at the end of a hole based on how many strokes it took to reach the green. Though there is only one course, the fact that you can get a different beat-em-up experience based on where you hit the ball eliminates repetition.

 

Ninja Golf also impresses with its visuals. The characters are large, highly detailed, and animated well. The side-scrolling is smooth with some great use of parallax scrolling. The fights with the dragon at the end of each hole look so glossy, you'd find it hard to believe you're not looking at a Genesis game."

 

However, indeed it is all subjective.  Different strokes for different folks. ?

[Lost Dragon]

Honest question-Is the Video Game Critic held in higher regards within the Atari community than others?.

 

 

 

I just wondered what makes his reviews stand out for scrutiny amongst the countless ones you can find online. 

[+save2600]

Yes, to the first question for me. Not necessarily talking about his default white text on a black background, but he's an easy read. A guy that cuts to the chase and whose preferences are relatable. Doesn't turbo-nerd the subject either. Instead of skipping through a wall of text, his relatively short paragraphs usually sum up a game nicely.

 

In this day and age of frivolous videos and podcasts, I find succinct brevity without the bullshit - refreshing.  

[+slx]

1 hour ago, save2600 said:

 

In this day and age of frivolous videos and podcasts, I find succinct brevity without the bullshit - refreshing.  

I‘ll second that. He‘s good for an overview and if I want all the details I can still listen to a 2hr podcast telling me every little bit there is to know about a game. 

 

The representation of his scores on AtariAge seems to be on the high side (or a bit compressed) with an F (for Karateka) translating to 58% and a D for Jinks just a bit higher at 65%. 

[+slx]

3 hours ago, Lost Dragon said:

Honest question-Is the Video Game Critic held in higher regards within the Atari community than others?.

 

 

 

I just wondered what makes his reviews stand out for scrutiny amongst the countless ones you can find online. 

Not sure about the first, I like his style and he seems to have an overview spanning more than one system. Together with a neat presentation that does it for me. Maybe being linked from AA with some of the others linked having moved to digital Nirvana helps. (Electric Escape and Granny Vinnie are harder to look up.)

[Lost Dragon]

4 hours ago, slx said:

Not sure about the first, I like his style and he seems to have an overview spanning more than one system. Together with a neat presentation that does it for me. Maybe being linked from AA with some of the others linked having moved to digital Nirvana helps. (Electric Escape and Granny Vinnie are harder to look up.)

Thank you.

 

I honestly wondered if he might of been an ex-games magazine writer or something? 

 

I had trusted reviewers in the sense i had followed them as they wrote reviews in my favourite magazines covering the C64,later ST and onto consoles  and wondered if he had established himself elsewhere before launching his site.

[Greg2600]

From his Facebook page.  Pretty sure he's just a game fan, was never a paid reviewer. 

Quote

The Video Game Critic (VGC) is the most comprehensive independent video game review site. The VGC is a computer professional with a passion for video games since the 1970's.

He reviews games for all major video game consoles from the Atari 2600 to the Nintendo Wii. Since 1999, he's posted over 4100 reviews.

One aspect that differentiates this site from other review sites is that games are graded based on how they compare with other games for the same system. Unlike most site who dole out mostly A's and B's, the VGC system is balanced, so he gives out just as many F's as he does A's.