From: marms@python.cs.unm.edu (Mike Arms)
Subject: Re: Sonic The Hedgehog -- More questions..
Reply-To: sandia!marms@unmvax.unm.edu (Mike Arms)
Organization: Dimsdale Brothers Extortion Agency
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 21:58:37 GMT

exuhag@exu.ericsson.se (James Hague) writes:
>David Isaacson writes:
>>
>>There isn't much to say but keep trying. You don't actually bash
>>Robotnik at the end of the Lab. Zone, just keep following him (without
>>dying :) )to get through with the zone.  The worst part is that if you
>>die part way through, you have no coins to protect you
>                                   ^^^^^
>
>Heh.  And people don't think Mario and Sonic are similar...

Well, yes, there are Coins in both Mario and Sonic.  But they're major use
differs.  Sonic cannot die as long as he has one or more coins, but loses
his coins anytime he is hit (he can scramble to retreive some of the loose 
coins most of the time).  Otherwise, coins in Sonic are used for bonus points
at the end of each round, obtaining 50 or more coins and jumping through the
big ring at the end of acts 1 & 2 of each Zone gets him to a special zone,
and obtaining multiples of 100 coins during an act gives him an extra life.
In Super Mario World, coins are not used as bonus, they are cummulative
throughout the game, they do not go away when hit, provide no protection,
and only provide an extra life when 100 have been obtained.  

I understand why you complain about modern video games, James.  But
both Sonic and SMW are excellent games.  They beat to hell pretty much
any of my many Atari 2600 carts (not saying much I suppose).  I'm kind
of waiting for a time when you will actually be happy with a game for a
modern home system (and comment same on this newsgroup).  You tend to
wax nostalgic on how so many old games "pioneered" the way and how
little games since then have added.  Since we have been talking about
"firsts" and that Pitfall was the earliest scrolling platform game, I
don't know about you but I did not care for that game much even back
then.  It was too simplistic; note not simple as it was very easy to
die.  There just was very little to do and fewer actions to master.
Compare this to SMW or Sonic.  Worlds better IMHO.  These two games are
real "games" in my mind.  They have depth.  There are puzzles.  They
require mastering more skills.  The action is varied.  And of course
the graphics/sound/music are orders of magnitude better, but that's not
too relevant except for the fact that it makes the game universe richer
and more enjoyable.  Sonic really does look like a good first cut at a
cartoon (not primitive stick figures like Pitfall).  

Compare SMW with its long ancestor, Donkey Kong (coin-op).  DK was very
simplistic.  SMW seems to be a least an order of magnitude better in
terms of depth, skills requirement, variety, action, etc.  

I will grant you that the old coin-op Defender and Stargate were probably
the best shooters still today.  There was just so much action in those
games.  They were/are excellent.  The Defender port to the Atari 2600
reeked, but the Stargate port to same was pretty good except for the
need to use another controller for the special buttons.

I know that your main point is that new games tend to be very lacking in
originality.  I grant you this point entirely.  But there is a lot to be
said for taking a basic idea (e.g. shooter, platform, puzzle, fighting,
etc.) and working it to such a level that it becomes a great game.  Most
of the basic games that pioneered an idea were not very good.  Nor were
the clones that followed.  But they improved upon the concept with each
new version.  We do get new ideas in video games occasionally, but they
tend to come from the coin-op or computer areas.  Shoot, just think how
much Robert Jung compliments the Lynx for its line of games which are
mostly ports of coin-ops (Note: I own several Lynxes and lots of carts
so I am not bashing).  It's just that the Lynx has only had too games
that I would consider fairly fresh: Slimeworld and Chip's Challenge.
Others like STUN Runner are definitely neat derivations of a basic
genre (and are great Lynx games to boot!).  

Anyway, this message has gone on long enough.  My point was that, just
because games are not original, does not mean that they are not the
best of their type and be excellent games to play.  Originality is
difficult.  For proof of this, look at any human endeavor.  Most is
building on the shoulders of giants.  We need the innovators to make
discrete advancements, but those who can develop others' ideas and 
make them shine are also greatly appreciated.  (Examples: Wing Commander
is a very good pseudo-flight simulator, Civilization is a great Empire-
like strategy game, Ultima Underworld is a very good 1st person perspective 
RPG, etc.)

-- 
Mike Arms
Sandia National Laboratories
uucp:      ...{ucbvax | gatech}!unmvax!sandia!marms
InterNet:  unmvax.unm.edu!sandia!marms   or   sandia!marms@unmvax.unm.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.video