The BEST 8 Bit Gaming Computer

[The_Laird]

Erm you really are a bit sad arn't you? That is your first post and its flames for the sake of what?

 

When you have grown up, checked your facts and done your homework come back and see me. bye!

 

But fogartylee has already checked the facts! Here they are again for you ...

 

Halls of Zatress - MIA (unlisted) - Scramble clone written in basic

Centipod - Author - Julian Skelly - thats not me! must be different game same name- Centipede clone

Zombie! - MIA (unlisted) - maybe Zombies!? err no, don't you think I know the names of my own titles? Kind of like Robotron only slower

Advanced Lawnmover Simulator - really??

Steve Davis Snooker - Author - Mike Lamb. - I'm not sure which 'original' snooker you refer to - CDS as I stated

Penalty Shootout - MIA (unlisted) - exactly that

Forest - Author - Graham T/ Relph - Who? Must be different game again

Big Boxing - MIA (unlisted) 128k only with digitised sound

Shooting Range - MIA (unlisted) 128k only with digitised sound

Digger Doug - MIA (unlisted) 128k only with digitised sound

 

You really are digging a deeper hole for yourself. Do continue ...

 

Shame you just quoted me!

[Computer_Classics]

Shame you just quoted me!

 

Yes. Big shame on me!

Looks like you are the big winner after all.

[fogartylee]

The only ones looking silly are the 0 post (sorry 2 post) trolls trying to stir things up for the sake of some long forgotten Speccy games.

 

*sigh*

 

 

Ummm..

 

I guess you've never been to WoS then? The last thing I am likely to do is go to another forum and start trolling.

 

They may be long forgotten games to you, but some of us take our work & the work of others seriously. I made the offer before & I'll make it again - PM me with some proper details and I will check them against the database. Should I be proved wrong, I will make a public apology for my 'trolling'

 

As it stands at the moment you are claiming to have written at least two games that you clearly haven't and by some weird co-incidence your entire back-catalogue of published titles remains unlisted. Concidering that the entire covertape collections are listed, that seems like we are deliberately boycotting your existance.

[Malc74]

[pocketmego]

Hello folks!

 

 

World of Spectrum claims a huge amount of software titles (above 10.000), but they count re-releases, type-in listings and Construction Kit games, so they're cheating too.

 

 

For the record, World of Spectrum does NOT count re-releases. Although I guess its easy to assume that they are counted.

 

I had a few on cover tapes on magazines and a few published by budget producers.

 

Halls of Zatress, Centipod, Zombie!, Advanced Lawnmover Simulator, Steve Davis Snooker (renamed by publisher CDS originally callled plain Snooker), Penalty Shootout, Forest, Big Boxing, Shooting Range and Digger Doug (which had digitised speech and music on the 128k!) were all games I wrote myself. I also helped out with the coding on many other games and did work for Durell, Star Soft, CDS and Firebird (who my uncle worked for).

 

 

OK. Here we go..

 

Halls of Zatress - MIA (unlisted)

Centipod - Author - Julian Skelly

Zombie! - MIA (unlisted) - maybe Zombies!? Author - Andrew Esmond

Advanced Lawnmover Simulator - really??

Steve Davis Snooker - Author - Mike Lamb. - I'm not sure which 'original' snooker you refer to.

Penalty Shootout - MIA (unlisted)

Forest - Author - Graham T/ Relph

Big Boxing - MIA (unlisted)

Shooting Range - MIA (unlisted)

Digger Doug - MIA (unlisted)

 

In addition, Star Soft did two titles:

 

Froggy - Author Karl Brazier - MIA

Theif - Authors/Publishers - Ducky & Starsoft

 

Steve Davis Snooker 128k was written using most of the code drom the original 1984 CDS game which was written in Basic! The 128 version allowed name entries, had better sound and a cheat mode where you could turn all the ball into bumper cars.

 

MIA (unlisted). In addition, as has been pointed out, the original was not written in BASIC.

 

 

Have you ever figured that maybe I don't want my games to appear on WOS????

 

If you have denied distribution of your titles, feel free to PM me & I will get the denied status verified. However, denied titles are still listed in the WoS database - for example Codemasters

 

This thread has no offcially lost me. I don't even know who Duncan MacDonald is. Even if I did know, I don't think I'd care if Kizza was or was not this person. All the guy said was he wrote a couple of games here and there . Geez, he never claimed to be freakin' Clive Sinclair, or anything.

 

Y'all need to just chill.

 

-Ray

 

The point is Ray, that this guy may or may not be claiming the hard work of others. How would you feel if you created something only for others to take credit? As can be seen from the known titles above, the authors are all different. As for the unlisted MIA's - I won't be pushing to get them added to the database just yet

 

I can't argue on this one. Its a very fair insight and a good post. I do believe proper creators should be creditied properly.

 

-Ray

[The_Laird]

 

My god you are sad!!!!

 

I really do pity you.

[Computer_Classics]

 

My god you are sad!!!!

 

I really do pity you.

 

And I'm sure 99% of the rest of us pity you. After all, pretending to have written games for an 8 bit computer is a bit weird.

[Malc74]

So I did a bit of research (fifth name down), as Mr Kizza asked me to, and I'm pretty sure I've come up with his real name, as well as this interesting little thread.

 

So this whole "claiming ownership of stuff he didn't write" isn't new then.

 

So then, Mr Kizza - I've done my research like you asked me to. Care to tell us all a bit more about how you managed to get Advanced Lawnmower Sim onto that YS covertape then?

 

Carry on posting by the way - you must have dug yourself almost all the way to Oz by now. Or maybe you've been stuck there the whole time...

[WOS Sard]

 

 

Incidentally, your date of birth as listed on this site would make you 7 years old when you wrote Steve Davis Snooker. Quite an achievement!

 

Steve Davis Snooker 128k was written using most of the code drom the original 1984 CDS game which was written in Basic! The 128 version allowed name entries, had better sound and a cheat mode where you could turn all the ball into bumper cars. If you had read my other post you would also have noticed that I wrote many games which my uncle (who taught me how to program) who worked for Telecomsoft (Firebird) for many years. But judging by the statement at the end of your post I'm guessing that maybe you can't read

 

Maybe he can't read ? Or maybe you can't remember what you've said about yourself in another topic thread ?

Let me help you....

 

http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?s...c=80605&hl=

 

Us Wos guys DO like a good giggle...... You Sir are busted

[The_Laird]

Err how exactly? I've already PM'ed some private details to one of your guys!

 

I did debate whether it was worth it to stop all the trolling . . . .

[Computer_Classics]

You have been well and truly exposed havn't you Kieren

I think some apologies are in order from you ...

[Alarm]

Heh, what an interesting thread. I actually know Mike Lamb (the real programmer of Steve Davis Snooker); perhaps I should ask him if he has heard of our friend and this amazing-sounding 128 version?

 

Thanks for the entertainment guys.

[WOS Sard]

Err how exactly? I've already PM'ed some private details to one of your guys!

 

I did debate whether it was worth it to stop all the trolling . . . .

 

How exactly ? Well it goes something like this.....

1) You claim to have written (amongst others) Steve Davis Snooker (despite the author being listed as Mike Lamb on infoseek...and there being no 128 version listed)

2) Malc points out that according to your profile your DOB was 1977 you would have been about 7 years old when you did.

3) Your profile DOB suddenly changes to 1971 , and you suggest to Malc that he can't read.

4) Malc posts google cache showing DOB before you changed it.

5) I enter stage left and post a link to a thread ON THIS VERY FORUM , where in Dec last year you said your age was 28 ( which believe it or not just happens to tie into your DOB being pretty much ...1977)

I could even post links to another post by you on here , where you talk about buying your 1st Atari Lynx in 1990 and how impressed your SCHOOL chum was , and how after your summer holidays , you went back TO SCHOOL to find 3 more chummys had got one too (you trend setter you) but I wont bother...

 

Now some may not see your age as particuarly important , but in an earlier post on this very thread you (for example) said you at one time had worked for Durell. Durell stopped making games in 1987 and went into making software for the insurance industry. Now if you WERE born in 1977 ( as you have indicated yourself by your own post I linked to ) that would have made you 10 years old when Durell ceased games production. Do you really need me to point out the slight problem in this ?

 

If this isn't the definition of busted.... I don't know what is.

 

Now you may choose to call this WOS invasion here "trolling" but most would see it as a simple and honest attempt to verify claims (of historical importance to the spectrum community) made by yourself on this VERY public forum , about the games you say you have had published. And so far , and this is the part I guess most of us are having dificulty with , you have done NOTHING to prove any of the suspicions some may have as being unfounded. In fact you seem to have , to say the least clouded the issue somewhat. You seem happy enough to be credited for the PD games you appear to have made for the ST, so why on earth would you shy away from recognition from PUBLISHED titles you wrote on the Speccy ? If you are correct in all this , and this has just been some huge misunderstanding (and I very much hope so) then explain to us , in this same PUBLIC place you've announced your work to the world , exactly how this misunderstanding has come about. Then it'll be apology city all round im sure.

 

Untill then we wait with baited breath on the light shedding details of your PM to whoever you sent it to

 

Regards

[psj3809]

The only ones looking silly are the 0 post (sorry 2 post) trolls trying to stir things up for the sake of some long forgotten Speccy games.

 

*sigh*

 

Yes another new user, and no i'm not a troll.

 

People here arent trying to stir it up, they just want to know the truth. The truth is you've been rumbled, many US Atari fans here might believe the BS you give them but now that you've been found out youre backed into a corner and your only 'get out' is to say the rest of us are trolls. If i posted once to advertise a viagra website or say my name is King Ombongo and i can give you a share of 28 mill for your bank details then yes i'm a troll.

 

I love the good old Speccy, been reading this thread and its been laughable. What sort of live must you lead if you have to make up that you were an ex programmer who wrote so many of these games ? You cant back it up at all and instead make out we're all trolls just because we've joined the forum. Why have we joined the forum ? Because this thread is unbelievable and needs some truth. One minute you are 28, then born in the early 70's making you 30 odd, then back to 28 again ??

 

What next ? In your part time you were also a stunt man and a film star ? Be a man and admit you were telling a fair few porkies. A very sad state of affairs when you have to pretend to be someone else or pretend to do something you havent. Great post by Sard above also.

 

You said "When you have grown up, checked your facts and done your homework come back and see me. bye!" , well the post above has stated a lot of facts, why not answer them ?

 

Basically you've been rumbled trying to impress some of the US Atari fans here, now the only thing you can say is 'theyre trolls' because a lot of people here have asked you questions which show you to be making this up. P.S - a tip for you, not advisable for people to lie about their age/job in forums.

Edited August 15, 2006 by psj3809

[Gregory DG]

Gee, interesting thread... Funny too...

 

BTW, I like the Atari 8-bitters...

[ScottHuggins]

Really dig all these machines..but I hafta lean towards the good ole C<64. It's where I cut my teeth on assembly language programming back in the 80's. The "speccy" is a neat looking machine. Wish I had one to mess with.

 

And yeah, this Mr Kizza guy got exposed! Very interesting read, indeed. Can't believe he also claimed some Atari ST games and was outed by the original authors. Wow.

 

Gee, interesting thread... Funny too...

 

BTW, I like the Atari 8-bitters...

[Matt_B]

Hi,

 

I'm another one who's come over from WOS, but I guess I should try and get this back in topic. Each machine has its own strengths and weakness so it's hard to pick an overall winner. Anyway here are my musings on the candidates:

 

Commodore 64: As the big seller of the bunch, it's the obvious pick and I'm not surprised it's streets ahead in the voting. The VIC 2 and the SID chips were way ahead of their time and it produced scads of classic games. That said, it did have something of an Achilles heel in the comparatively slow CPU that tended to mean games relied on the hardware tricks of the VIC 2. As such, it lagged behind other formats in terms of innovative graphics, particularly 3D.

 

Spectrum: Although none of the hardware was particularly outstanding, it had an excellent ratio of CPU speed to video RAM which meant you could do much fancier graphics in software and didn't need to rely on hardware tricks so much, which was just as well as the machine didn't have many. I'm sure it's no coincidence that there were a much greater range of graphical styles on the machine, and it always seemed to have that little bit of extra zip in 3D graphics. The most obvious downsides were the poor sound and colour clash.

 

Atari 400: Coming a few years before the previous two machines this really belongs to a different generation of home computers. They were great in their day and I'd have loved to have had one at the time, but they began to look really dated when the Spectrum and C64 hit the scene. The later 8-bit Ataris dragged things back a bit, but they didn't really get back on track until the ST came out.

 

Apple II: Another one of that earlier generation and at a much higher price. A great machine in its day although it never really seemed that cut out for games. On the other hand if you wanted a business computer in 1980, one of these with a CP/M emulator and copies of Visicalc, dBase and Wordstar was the thing to have if you could afford it.

 

Amstrad CPC: I had one of these, but I thought that it never really cut it as a games machine. Although technically superior to the Spectrum in nearly every respect, it just didn't have the CPU power to put the improved graphics to good use and most of the games for it ended up second best. Also, being a latecomer to the market so many games were simply hacked over from the Spectrum without any serious attempt to utilize the CPC's own features. Still, like the Apple II, they were great machines for semi-serious use.

 

Another machine that I think deserves a mention is the Acorn BBC Micro. It was too pricey to get a very big user base, and was virtually unknown outside the UK. However, this was the one machine that came close to the Spectrum in terms of CPU power to video RAM ratio and although it didn't produce too many classic games, it can claim host to some of the most groundbreaking. Have a look at Elite, Firetrack, Revs and The Sentinel for starters.

[Cybergoth]

Cool to have all you WOS guys around, so I can thank you for the excellent work on your database

 

Now that I have your attention , could I possibly bug you with something completely different?

 

Do you have any more info on They Stole a Million, then what I already found out?

 

Regarding the otherwize totally boring subject: C64 of course. System 3, Thalamus, Rainbow Arts and other C64 gaming gods easily blow any other 8-Bit machine outta the water

[jesusc]

To my console glazed eyes, one computer is as good as the other, but being it's the one I'm most familiar with, I went with the Commodore. However, had I known it was so far ahead in the polls before I voted, I would have voted something else, just to be different.

 

As to the other part of this thread, that was the least troll-like trolling I ever saw. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them a troll, and i believe your name calling should warrant an automatic 24 hour ban.

[WOS Sard]

Now that I have your attention , could I possibly bug you with something completely different?

 

Do you have any more info on They Stole a Million, then what I already found out?

 

Hmm it seems that info on this game is pretty thin on the ground for this game on the spectrum as well....The only thing thats there , are these two articles on tigress , one of which is mentioned in your Lemon thread I suspect....

 

Heres the Crash Feature

 

And a smaller feature here at Sinclair User that also mentions Ramjam.

 

Hope ( but I doubt ) that helps

[Cybergoth]

Hope ( but I doubt ) that helps

 

Well, since I've seen both articles before, it seems I'm pretty good using your infoseek.

 

Guess I was hoping for some insider info not in the database

[pocketmego]

Gee, interesting thread... Funny too...

 

BTW, I like the Atari 8-bitters...

 

Huh, an on topic post.

 

I was too caught up in all the British guys fighting. You know it isn't at all like it is in the movies. I was hoping for a few Sod Offs, maybe a Ye Bloody Wanker or something.

 

 

 

-Ray

Edited August 15, 2006 by pocketmego

[pocketmego]

Hi,

 

I'm another one who's come over from WOS, but I guess I should try and get this back in topic. Each machine has its own strengths and weakness so it's hard to pick an overall winner. Anyway here are my musings on the candidates:

 

Commodore 64: As the big seller of the bunch, it's the obvious pick and I'm not surprised it's streets ahead in the voting. The VIC 2 and the SID chips were way ahead of their time and it produced scads of classic games. That said, it did have something of an Achilles heel in the comparatively slow CPU that tended to mean games relied on the hardware tricks of the VIC 2. As such, it lagged behind other formats in terms of innovative graphics, particularly 3D.

 

Spectrum: Although none of the hardware was particularly outstanding, it had an excellent ratio of CPU speed to video RAM which meant you could do much fancier graphics in software and didn't need to rely on hardware tricks so much, which was just as well as the machine didn't have many. I'm sure it's no coincidence that there were a much greater range of graphical styles on the machine, and it always seemed to have that little bit of extra zip in 3D graphics. The most obvious downsides were the poor sound and colour clash.

 

Atari 400: Coming a few years before the previous two machines this really belongs to a different generation of home computers. They were great in their day and I'd have loved to have had one at the time, but they began to look really dated when the Spectrum and C64 hit the scene. The later 8-bit Ataris dragged things back a bit, but they didn't really get back on track until the ST came out.

 

Apple II: Another one of that earlier generation and at a much higher price. A great machine in its day although it never really seemed that cut out for games. On the other hand if you wanted a business computer in 1980, one of these with a CP/M emulator and copies of Visicalc, dBase and Wordstar was the thing to have if you could afford it.

 

Amstrad CPC: I had one of these, but I thought that it never really cut it as a games machine. Although technically superior to the Spectrum in nearly every respect, it just didn't have the CPU power to put the improved graphics to good use and most of the games for it ended up second best. Also, being a latecomer to the market so many games were simply hacked over from the Spectrum without any serious attempt to utilize the CPC's own features. Still, like the Apple II, they were great machines for semi-serious use.

 

Another machine that I think deserves a mention is the Acorn BBC Micro. It was too pricey to get a very big user base, and was virtually unknown outside the UK. However, this was the one machine that came close to the Spectrum in terms of CPU power to video RAM ratio and although it didn't produce too many classic games, it can claim host to some of the most groundbreaking. Have a look at Elite, Firetrack, Revs and The Sentinel for starters.

 

 

I was REALLY tempted to include the Beeb in my poll. But, then I thought that the Amstrad was probably pushing it in terms of machines known outside of the UK. I know a bit more about British computers than most US gamers both do to my interest in Retro Gamer magazine and a great book I have on the history of gaming which has an entire section dedicated to the development of gaming by way of Europe.

 

-Ray

[Alarm]

 

I was too caught up in all the British guys fighting. You know it isn't at all like it is in the movies. I was hoping for a few Sod Offs, maybe a Ye Bloody Wanker or something.

 

 

 

-Ray

 

Shut it you muppet. Cor blimey, luv a duck...

[Spector]

You're supposed to just blow the bloody DOORS off!!!