I tried to like this game back in the day but even back then I recall a
Block 9 review I wrote for
Turtles 2: The Coin-Op saying "This is the game
Turtles 1 should have been".
In short, it's awful. Pretty, but awful.
Was not a bad game... but would need far more polishing and be a little less easy (incredible when you think of the other versions...)
As an idiot child, I spent my pocket money on TMHT World Tour, the computer colouring book, rather than this!
The NES original is a classic, I remember spending many a time playing through it on a friend's NES. The Speccy and Amstrad ports aren't *that* bad, but really let down by the lack of directional fighting moves. They are at least quite pretty though, with some nice parallax effects. It has to be said that emulators don't really do the Speccy version justice, as without the PAL colour bleed and pixels that are too sharp, they tend to highlight the blockiness of the graphics that you didn't really get on the real machine. The biggest problem with the game is that it was laughably easy, once you get the hang of switching turtles at the right point to avoid any of them losing too much health and using pizzas effectively.
The Amiga version though, wow that looks really, really bad. I don't think I've ever seen it before, but you'd be gutted if you forked out for that and then saw the 8-bit versions.
NES TMNT at AGDQ'16.
I was in the audience watching this game being smashed to death!
http://youtu.be/XbdZGxeWBGM?t=410 (http://youtu.be/XbdZGxeWBGM?t=410)
Quote from: andycadley on 20:24, 01 March 16
The Amiga version though, wow that looks really, really bad. I don't think I've ever seen it before, but you'd be gutted if you forked out for that and then saw the 8-bit versions.
I think exactly the same ;D
The lack of directional attacks is the primary reason why the game is awful. I could happily ignore the graphic problems if the game wasn't designed to be undertaken using moves that just aren't present. Nevertheless, I review based on what I see, and what I see is a cheap port that was rushed to cash in on a fad.
Quote from: Zoe Robinson on 16:53, 01 March 16
I tried to like this game back in the day but even back then I recall a Block 9 review I wrote for Turtles 2: The Coin-Op saying "This is the game Turtles 1 should have been".
In short, it's awful. Pretty, but awful.
It's an understandable cash in. The coin op version of this was no great shakes either, it was also knocked out to capitalised on the popularity of the series. The sequel came out in the arcades at the end of that very same year too, and that's the one that everyone came to know and love.
I actually enjoyed it, my main gripe with it was that it was far too easy. Even difficulty selection would have saved this, but it was ridiculously simple.
I also remember the tape version and it's codes on dark wine coloured paper to prevent from being photocopied. Didn't stop me from spending a couple of hours writing down the numbers on a page anyway! xD
I liked it.
Probably because it was one of the few Amstrad games I could complete :D
Vet nice scrolling and graphics so I dont see all the hate for it.
As for the lack of directional attacks someone is going to have to explain why that is a problem and how directional attacks would've been used here.
I don't recall them being needed
Since Konami had the rights to the Ninja Turtles it's safe to say that the NES was the original version, as Probe developed the ports to the home computers.
I had the misfortune of seeing this after playing the arcade game & it felt like a quick cash in to me as well. I didn't understand why we weren't getting the arcade game everyone loved so much.
The lack of directional controls on the CPC & Spectrum versions is a blessing. Pushing up & fire to attack up caused the character to jump half the time on the ST & Amiga versions. I think it was a wise decision to remove the need to attack upwards, & you don't need to attack upwards. Every enemy is easily reachable by getting next to them. Lots of games suffered because home computers only used a single fire button. I think Street Fighter 2 would be the best example of that.
With that in mind I appreciated the game for what it was when I got it as a kid. Even today, I still give it a go every now & again.
By the way, you kept getting Bebop & Rocksteady mixed up. Bebop is the hog & Rocksteady is the rhino. I also have to ask, why did you keep saying the Amiga was a new computer? By the time this game came out it had been in the marketplace for 5 years, that's a pretty long time for any piece of hardware.
The NES version is definitely the original, it was out a long time before the home computer versions were ever advertised.
I suspect you're right about the fire button issue too, it was always awkward to translate the multi button controls from the consoles and arcades of the time onto the single button joysticks and often didn't go well. It does make for some really awkward points where getting hit is almost inevitable, such as the guy right at the top of the ladder. Little things like that could've been improved by either avoiding the situation or making the default attack when on a ladder go upwards. A bit more polish would have helped for sure.
Quote from: Dizrythmia on 13:30, 02 March 16
By the way, you kept getting Bebop & Rocksteady mixed up. Bebop is the hog & Rocksteady is the rhino.
Fair enough. Doesn't change the fact that the 8-bits are only using the rhino sprite.
Quote from: Dizrythmia on 13:30, 02 March 16
I also have to ask, why did you keep saying the Amiga was a new computer? By the time this game came out it had been in the marketplace for 5 years, that's a pretty long time for any piece of hardware.
The Amiga 500, the one that was the big, popular home computer, wasn't out 5 year when this 1990 game came out; it was from 1987. It did, however, take some time to filter out into the home markets and become the dominant force; which is why I thought it was released in 1990 (because that's when everyone I knew who ever got one actually got one). It's a dating mistake, but a reasonable one under the circumstances.
Quote from: Zoe Robinson on 00:29, 03 March 16
The Amiga 500, the one that was the big, popular home computer, wasn't out 5 year when this 1990 game came out; it was from 1987. It did, however, take some time to filter out into the home markets and become the dominant force; which is why I thought it was released in 1990 (because that's when everyone I knew who ever got one actually got one). It's a dating mistake, but a reasonable one under the circumstances.
Yeah it was the Batman pack, which arrived in '89, that really put the Amiga on the map. Before that it was a bit niche and not really getting much attention from developers, indeed it would still be a while before it was the default 16-bit development environment which for a long time was the Atari ST.
Despite remembering the batman pack well and seeing it earlier, over time I seem to have convinced myself the Amiga 500 didn't come out until 1990 at the very earliest as well
That Batman pack was launched to compete with the ST as well, Atari were releasing the STe versions at the end of 89. The enhanced STs were somewhat of a flop, despite having a better palette, nobody bothered using it! :laugh:
Quote from: Shaun M. Neary on 13:31, 04 March 16
That Batman pack was launched to compete with the ST as well, Atari were releasing the STe versions at the end of 89. The enhanced STs were somewhat of a flop, despite having a better palette, nobody bothered using it! :laugh:
The curse of the Plus strikes again!
Seriously though, if your market already has computer X and computer Y is unlikely to sell big numbers, why would you spend time programming to use computer Y when you can instead put all your work into something that runs on X as well as Y?
The only time I've seen catering for extra features actually work is the "sound on +2/+3" extras on Speccy games. For everything else, it's a gimmick that doesn't pay off.
Quote from: Zoe Robinson on 19:45, 04 March 16
The curse of the Plus strikes again!
Seriously though, if your market already has computer X and computer Y is unlikely to sell big numbers, why would you spend time programming to use computer Y when you can instead put all your work into something that runs on X as well as Y?
The only time I've seen catering for extra features actually work is the "sound on +2/+3" extras on Speccy games. For everything else, it's a gimmick that doesn't pay off.
Curse of the plus... before the plus too!
I'm still convinced the plus series was the final nail in the coffin for Amstrad. Had they done that a year earlier, it might have made more of a difference, but instead, they ignored the CPC, pushed all TV and radio marketing for Christmas for the Speccy series and left the CPC out in the cold.
Atari on the other hand, just abandoned the ST to work on the Jaguar... the most irrelevant machine in console history! :laugh:
The Plus could have worked even when it was released, if it hadn't been working on 8-bit technology. I'm still convinced that the Plus sound setup and the enhanced graphics would have been more than fine if they had been accompanied by a 16-bit CPU.
The Plus should've been 16bit not just to compete with the amiga and st but just to keep up with the times.
Imagine if the gx4000 had been a 16 but console.
Probably would've still been ignored.
I had to edit this because of the autocorrect on my phone making me sound mad
The thing is, the 16 bit console market really didn't break any ground in the UK until mid to late 1991. Hence why I reckon they a year too late with the GX4000. Had it been designed a bit earlier, it would have been a strong contender to the SMS/NES if it had decent backing from the software houses.
Of course, by the time 1990 rolled around, houses were exclusively being forced to pick between Sega and Nintendo to use their specific platform, so there's a chance the ship had sailed for Amstrad anyway.
An overambitious project that fell flat on it's face.
Over-ambition? Amstrad? ;D
Quote from: Zoe Robinson on 23:23, 04 March 16
Over-ambition? Amstrad? ;D
I know, right?! :laugh: