(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqSqWFQ7be8)
[/url]
22 October 2016, 5:11 pm[AMSTRAD CPC] Hard Drivin' - Longplay & Review
Source: Xyphoe (http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFji91gjx1g58cAMUnVs9qg)
Yeah, well, let's admit it, those machines weren't enough for this kind of stuff... but kudos for the effort, and for the vid, @Xyphoe (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=109) !
Quote from: Gryzor on 15:53, 26 January 17
Yeah, well, let's admit it, those machines weren't enough for this kind of stuff... but kudos for the effort, and for the vid, @Xyphoe (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=109) !
Disagree, this was just a lazy port.
Stunt Car Racer came out a few months later and had a similar premise and did much better. If the programmers had actually put some effort into this, we could have had a very different result.
Well, better indeed, but still: at 3fps I wouldn't call it exactly a fun thing to play:
Quote from: Gryzor on 11:26, 27 January 17
Well, better indeed, but still: at 3fps I wouldn't call it exactly a fun thing to play:
Did you really care about 3fps back in 1990? It was still faster than Hard Drivin! ;D
stunt car racer was awfull on CPC and unplayable instead of Atari & Amiga versions
Quote from: roudoudou on 15:57, 27 January 17
stunt car racer was awfull on CPC and unplayable instead of Atari & Amiga versions
Yes, fair comparison to machines that had four times more horse power. ;)
The comparison was Hard Drivin vs Stunt Car Racer on the same platform.
In my opinion, both games can't be compared, their engine is different. Yet:
- Stun Car Racer is awesome. Both playable and very fast for a CPC.
- Hard Driving is unplayable but still has an incredible engine, though it seems it was a bit too much for a CPC indeed. It's very easy to see through walls and stuff.
I suggest you try Battle Command for (in my opinion) the best engine, but you only rotate around one axis, so it's simpler than Hard Driving.
Quote from: Targhan on 16:23, 27 January 17
In my opinion, both games can't be compared, their engine is different. Yet:
- Stun Car Racer is awesome. Both playable and very fast for a CPC.
- Hard Driving is unplayable but still has an incredible engine, though it seems it was a bit too much for a CPC indeed. It's very easy to see through walls and stuff.
I suggest you try Battle Command for (in my opinion) the best engine, but you only rotate around one axis, so it's simpler than Hard Driving.
People need to try to remember that Hard Drivin was a very complex arcade machine, they'd brought in Doug Millikan (sp?) who was finishing his fathers work regarding the aestethics of an actual car to make the simulation as real as possible. When the speed track was finished, they added in the stunt track as a joke to amuse themselves, and then kept it in as an option.
So it was an overambitious project to undertake, but it was also rushed. I don't think ANY 8bit version was playable.
Quote from: Shaun M. Neary on 16:18, 27 January 17
Yes, fair comparison to machines that had four times more horse power. ;)
The comparison was Hard Drivin vs Stunt Car Racer on the same platform.
I prefer the fun of hard drivin (even if the engine and physics are crap) maybe because it's an open world
I was sooooooo disappointed by stunt car racer whereas the car behaviour is a lot better (car suspensions). But the lack of fps in an arcade game is too redhibitory
Quote from: roudoudou on 17:14, 27 January 17
I prefer the fun of hard drivin (even if the engine and physics are crap) maybe because it's an open world
I was sooooooo disappointed by stunt car racer whereas the car behaviour is a lot better (car suspensions). But the lack of fps in an arcade game is too redhibitory
Hard Drivin in the arcade was a lot of fun. Hard Drivin on the CPC was awful. Nasty colours, fiddly controls regardless if you used joystick or keys, no sound at all on the 64k machines and just sloooooow.
Didn't have any of those problems on Stunt Car Racer, but each to their own.