Megacom Games has just begun a Kickstarter and Steam Greenlight campaign for what I would class as the coolest looking retro styled racer we've seen this year so far. Set in a futuristic 2000 but developed in a 1980's cinematic sci-fi style, 'Power Drive 2000' is a space aged time warp into an era of psychedelic colours with a totally radical Synthwave soundtrack!
I always have, I just keep forgetting to check.. which is half a good thing since I can do a binge view every so often The soundtrack for this is just pure 80s synth/electro awesomeness, including my newly-discovered "Dance with the Dead" too!
Next time another lazy ass indie dev presents a game with pixels so big they could blot out the sun calling it "retro", I'll burn the screenshots of this game onto his face with a 100.000 watt laser just so the fucker doesn't forget what retro really is.
If you can't tell, I'm fed up with ugly ass indie games that have horrible graphics not even a 30 year old Atari XT game would have. As a retro gamer, I find it offensive when their shitty ass pixelated shit is called "retro". They used to make gorgeous art with the few pixels they had and nowadays, having a 16 million colour tablet, they actually make CGA games look majestic.
Next time another lazy ass indie dev presents a game with pixels so big they could blot out the sun calling it "retro", I'll burn the screenshots of this game onto his face with a 100.000 watt laser just so the fucker doesn't forget what retro really is.
I think you're forgetting what it is too, to be completely fair. There was no system in the 80s capable of playing something looking like this. Have you seen the screens and videos? Nothing would have looked anywhere near as impressive as this back then, it wouldn't have been technically feasible Even the "super large ugly pixels!" DriftStage wouldn't have been possible back then either. I get a lot of developers like to make low-fi visual games and throw "retro!" on there, but I don't think any of them are truly saying "retro!" as in; "this is how it looked", but rather it's more like "this is styled the same"
Quote:
If you can't tell, I'm fed up with ugly ass indie games that have horrible graphics not even a 30 year old Atari XT game would have. As a retro gamer, I find it offensive when their shitty ass pixelated shit is called "retro". They used to make gorgeous art with the few pixels they had and nowadays, having a 16 million colour tablet, they actually make CGA games look majestic.
Again, I disagree. As someone that grew up playing games on C16/C64 and Spectrum, half the "retro!" games today still wouldn't have been possible back then. I think you're concentrating on the "pixels" too much and forgetting how games REALLY looked in the early/mid 80s.
I think you're forgetting what it is too, to be completely fair. There was no system in the 80s capable of playing something looking like this. Have you seen the screens and videos? Nothing would have looked anywhere near as impressive as this back then, it wouldn't have been technically feasible Even the "super large ugly pixels!" DriftStage wouldn't have been possible back then either. I get a lot of developers like to make low-fi visual games and throw "retro!" on there, but I don't think any of them are truly saying "retro!" as in; "this is how it looked", but rather it's more like "this is styled the same"
Erm you missed the mark by like a galaxy ... this is about how the game hits a style that truly captures the 80's - the way Blood Dragon did. Of course it wouldn't have been possible but indies love throwing the word "retro"' around as if it was an indian woman between a gang of indian rapists. They don't get what it means. Their games never FEEL retro - it doesn't matter whether games back then could achieve it or not. They can NOW.
Quote:
Again, I disagree. As someone that grew up playing games on C16/C64 and Spectrum, half the "retro!" games today still wouldn't have been possible back then. I think you're concentrating on the "pixels" too much and forgetting how games REALLY looked in the early/mid 80s.
Yeah, nice try but I'm a huge retro gamer that plays 30 year old games as a hobby. Unless you go for the really old Atari 2600 days, they looked better than nearly all "retro" indie games out there. Pixel art is, as the word says, an art to do right and back then, there were many talented people that worked for games studios - you only need to look at the box art to see this (very often done by the same people back then). And most indie devs that go for a pixelated retro look are completely incapable of producing anything that even comes close to deserving the name. I'd LOVE to see an indie game that has gorgeous pixel art but I can't even think of a single one off the top of my head.
Sin317-"im 31 years old and still surprised at how much shit comes out of my ass actually ..."
SteamDRM-"Call of Duty is the symbol of the true perfection in every aspect. Call of Duty games are like Mozart's/Beethoven's symphonies"
deadpoetic-"are you new to the cyberspace?"
Erm you missed the mark by like a galaxy ... this is about how the game hits a style that truly captures the 80's - the way Blood Dragon did.
That's interpretation of the word retro. Some use it as a way of describing feeling, some use it for visuals, others use it for audio. There is no single definitive use of the word in gaming. This hits all the right 80s notes, like Blood Dragon, because of the music and the neon. Others do it in terms of pixel art or platforming gameplay, etc.
red_avatar wrote:
Their games never FEEL retro - it doesn't matter whether games back then could achieve it or not. They can NOW.
I disagree. I've played plenty of "retro styled" games that absolutely FELT retro, they FELT it in visuals, FELT it in gameplay, FELT it style. They evoked memories of the 80s, of my C64, they evoked memories of the early 90s with my Miggy and my SNES.
Quote:
Yeah, nice try but I'm a huge retro gamer that plays 30 year old games as a hobby.
The 1981 part of my name isn't my high score on Galaga I've been gaming since I was 2, my first system was the Atari 2600, and I'm 34 in a week. I didn't talk about C64 as a means of overriding your statement or dick swinging, just a statement that I've been gaming for 32 years and remember quite clearly what they USED to look like, without romanticising and forgetting. Too many people like to cry "STUPID PIXELS! GAEMS LOOKED BETTER THAN THAT IN THE 80s!" and they simply didn't. At least, not for the most part, not on home systems, not until late in the decades. Early to mid 80s was firmly Atari, Commodore, Sinclair and NES era.
Nothing about what I've said here, now, or ever has been to discredit your opinion or tell you that you're "wrong" or that my "experience" trumps yours. That isn't my intention, rather I'm just saying that pixelly games of TODAY simply wouldn't have been generally possible back THEN. To some, or a lot, they're ugly and distracting.. and that is FINE! Personal taste is absolutely personal after all I happen to love pixelly games so that's why I'm not one of those pissed off at the stream of pixelly titles indie devs put out.
Quote:
And most indie devs that go for a pixelated retro look are completely incapable of producing anything that even comes close to deserving the name.
Subjective opinion, not fact.
Quote:
I'd LOVE to see an indie game that has gorgeous pixel art but I can't even think of a single one off the top of my head.
I don't believe you're being serious here, so I'm not going to bother listing a million titles that evidence their existence, but I will show these;
It's not always true though, like a lot of these 'retro' Indy platformers are bested in every single way by games like 'shadow of the beast' released 1989 on every level, art, graphics, music, challenge.
Some of these games I just wonder why people don't just play the old games. Example ( and I own it) shovel knight vs. Say Turrican or super metroid, those two older games I would say are better on every single level than shovel knight.
I just think asking $25 when games from mid to late 80's compare and at times best them is a bit shit.
That's interpretation of the word retro. Some use it as a way of describing feeling, some use it for visuals, others use it for audio. There is no single definitive use of the word in gaming. This hits all the right 80s notes, like Blood Dragon, because of the music and the neon. Others do it in terms of pixel art or platforming gameplay, etc.
I think the answer is "all of the above" - retro isn't just limited to one element but a mix of several. Graphics and music being the most important I find. You can have a modern-style game with retro graphics and sound after all.
sabin1981 wrote:
I disagree. I've played plenty of "retro styled" games that absolutely FELT retro, they FELT it in visuals, FELT it in gameplay, FELT it style. They evoked memories of the 80s, of my C64, they evoked memories of the early 90s with my Miggy and my SNES.
Perhaps my fault for using the word "never" but I've played and seen perhaps several hundred indie games and it's only a tiny tiny amount of them that get it right. Very very few have graphics that make me nod in approval. In the vast majority of cases, the giant pixels are just to cut down art design costs and to make animation easier. My problem is that they then slap "retro" on it as an excuse - THAT is what pisses me off. That, and many devs who can't bother finding proper artists to do the pixel art.
Also too many indie games play way too fast to feel retro mechanically - old games weren't that fast because the hardware couldn't deal with fast scrolling.
Quote:
The 1981 part of my name isn't my high score on Galaga I've been gaming since I was 2, my first system was the Atari 2600, and I'm 34 in a week. I didn't talk about C64 as a means of overriding your statement or dick swinging, just a statement that I've been gaming for 32 years and remember quite clearly what they USED to look like, without romanticising and forgetting. Too many people like to cry "STUPID PIXELS! GAEMS LOOKED BETTER THAN THAT IN THE 80s!" and they simply didn't. At least, not for the most part, not on home systems, not until late in the decades. Early to mid 80s was firmly Atari, Commodore, Sinclair and NES era.
But you can't stick to the lowest systems like the Spectrum, Atari 2600 and the worst C64 games (I say worst because C64 had many good looking games considering its limited capabilities). In fact, even the Spectrum could handle better graphics than some of the blocky indie games. Anything more modern walks all over the worst offenders.
The kind of games that makes me feel retro, are arcade games and those games looked good from as early as 1982. Arcade cabinets is what most people my age feel retro about for obvious reasons (many European families couldn't afford home systems).
Quote:
Subjective opinion, not fact.
Considering most don't have proper talented artists? I think you can consider it fact.
Quote:
I don't believe you're being serious here, so I'm not going to bother listing a million titles that evidence their existence, but I will show these;
I spent half an hour on Steam digging through indie games to find an example to prove me wrong - you clearly found some, and I won't disagree with those (except with Valdis Story - that's not pixel art but just 2D art) since I agree those graphics look great (first time I heard of these games too) but my point remains that good looking indie games that use pixelated graphics is not that easy.
To name a few of my favorite games with gorgeous graphics: Star Control II, Lucas Arts adventures, Dark Legions, Beneath A Steel Sky, Lands of Lore, Dune, Halloween Harry, etc. etc. - not the oldest but these had graphics that still look amazing:
Star Control II, Lucas Arts adventures, Dark Legions, Beneath A Steel Sky, Lands of Lore, Dune, Halloween Harry, etc. etc
They also had large development teams comprised of incredibly talented devs from a multitude of disciplines. I don't think that's a fair comparison when talking about a handful of devs in an indie team. Well, except Halloween Harry ("Alien Carnage") but come on, that's from 1993 and kind of proves my point even more, doesn't it? That's from '93 and yet looks like an '88 Mega Drive game, one could argue that's because it was made by a couple of people rather than a hugely successful development team. Though if we're being fair, you put up a picture of Dune ... well that does look good, but then, so does this;
As for the rest? I get your point, I always have and I've never discounted it. I know some people don't like the push for pixelly games and that's fine. I happen to love them (for the most part, but I'm talking about genuine pixelly goodness, not that ^^ "Maniac Mansion" looking crap above ) which is why I'm more accepting of those games. The way I see it, pixelly games aren't just retro styled (and I firmly believe they are) but it's also a completely new art/game style in itself. "Pixel" is now pretty much a subgenre
my IMo:
As of now this game is unplayable with a keyboard setup , when you press Boost and up it locks your movement ... but not when you play with a XBox360 pad hmmm
And it has a input lag when you play with a keyboard comparing to pad ... half a second making you miss turns First try is with a keyboard ... second one with a XBox360 pad
Driving model is kinda stiff ... ice skate like , you don't feel the wheels ... would be nice to get a feed back rumble
It needs more restrictions/slowness when you fail and not drive on the road
When you hit things now full force you bounce like a Ball and when you hit the ground you are stuck ... showed in this vid
Sounds of the car should be more aggressive
You get boost by only drifting ...but you can brake this when you pulsate press the Boost button and Brake button and hold UP-LEFT /Up-Right you get infinitive boost... could be a glitch ... not shown here
Smoke on wheels would have been nice
and haha the Author of the Menu music did a hidden remix of Alphaville - Sounds Like A Melody LULZ
it doesnt lock your movement, most likely ur keyboard just doesnt stand the combo of arrow up + b + arrow left (same as mine, arrow right works fine though)
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Even the "super large ugly pixels!" DriftStage wouldn't have been possible back then either. I get a lot of developers like to make low-fi visual games and throw "retro!" on there, but I don't think any of them are truly saying "retro!" as in; "this is how it looked", but rather it's more like "this is styled the same"
I've been gaming since I was 2, my first system was the Atari 2600, and I'm 34 in a week. I didn't talk about C64 as a means of overriding your statement or dick swinging, just a statement that I've been gaming for 32 years and remember quite clearly what they USED to look like, without romanticising and forgetting. Too many people like to cry "STUPID PIXELS! GAEMS LOOKED BETTER THAN THAT IN THE 80s!" and they simply didn't. At least, not for the most part, not on home systems, not until late in the decades. Early to mid 80s was firmly Atari, Commodore, Sinclair and NES era.
I happen to love pixelly games so that's why I'm not one of those pissed off at the stream of pixelly titles indie devs put out.
