Originally Posted by marco pedrana
me too i always thought that Team17 games, while being important to my gamer days, were subtly flawed. either it was the graphics whose feeling i did not get, like they were made by someone whose taste unconsciously i really dislike, like elements of it you could see repeatedly so to catch it, but nevertheless it was uncoherent, unispired.
or the gameplay that had some "i don't underatand why ever they did that" here and there. i played them a lot though and they are not bad either.
I do tend to agree to a certain extent concerning what was said earlier about some Team17 games lacking soul... but still I don't think of many of their games as 'bad'... rather, just not necessarily original and inspiring...
This is what I wrote elsewhere concerning Superfrog for the CD32:
"A good example of a game not realised the way it should have been realised. At first it bothered me that the levels were maze like and that one had to collect X items to be able to enter the exit (how often have we not seen this in Amiga games where it has been rather obvious that the collecting part have been nothing but a way to extend the playtime and try to disguise bad level designs), but with time I came to appreciate this very aspect of the game; the levels really are well and intriguingly designed. Other good aspects of the game is the charming intro (and so is the ending although rather sexist, but whatever), really nice music with well memorable tunes and finally beautiful graphics although way too static for my taste; at times it feels like jumping arund on one big picture since pretty much nothing is moving besides the enemies. However, I do think that the challenge is somewhat uneven, since some of the later stages are way easier than the first ones, and also we have this hellish gap of spikes at the final stage that most people never will be able to fly over. Way to go, developers! Besides that, it also bother me that the enemies move at a constant 25 FPS while the game in itself run in perfect 50Hz; the scrolling is simply perfect while the movement of the enemies isn't. But, the two things that bothers me the most is the catastrophal password system which renders obtaining the passwords nearly impossible aswell as the way too easy final boss. I'm not satisfied."
To sum it all up... I think Superfrog is a decent game which had more potential than deliverance. With just a little more soul and editing out the flaws I think it could have been, to me, more or less perfect.
...and this I wrote on Super Stardust AGA:
"Some people might be put off by this game when they realize how hard it is to master. But, I find it being nothing but a worthy challange, and with time one WILL get better and better at controlling the ship. It just takes some pratice and a lot of patience. Normally I would be put off by this kind of thoughness, but the game feels so fair that I possibly can't blame them for making it this hard. Add to this some marvellous graphics (which haven't dated the slighest), some excellent music (it is really addictive) and the lack of making use of a second button (which leads us to the only thing I dislike about the AGA version of this game: I hate the fact that one has to use 'space' to access the menu, especially when pressing button number two on the joypad/joystick should suffice) and you have one hell of a game. Unlike Shadow of the Beast there is more to this game than just looks and technical splendor; I wholeheartedly thank Bloodhouse and Team 17 for that. This is simply one of the most impressive and addictive games on the Amiga, ever, and, no, it is not too hard; it is just YOU and YOU and YOU that can't call yourselves proper power players. But, off the record... I haven't managed to beat this game either."
...and notice the irony at the end. It is simply what I have been slapped in the face with over and over again while claiming Shadow of the Beast and it's sequel to be unreasonably hard. Super Stardust AGA, however, is just hard... according to me... never unfair or, like in SotB2, offering 1 minute gameplay and 10 minutes loading times the first 50 times playing it. Hehe. Oh, well, whatever.
Concerning Project X vs. Xenon 2... Xenon 2 is one of those games I without hestitation will throw in the garbage bin if given to me. It might be just like with Gods, that Xenon 2 is offering some kind of good gameplay that I can't see that lies hidden beneath what I find a hysterically tragic technological presentation (non smooth scroll, the most repetative soundtrack ever, graphicswise repetative level design, slow controls... well, you know me by now, I have gone through all this before with Gods). Compared to other contemporary shooters, especially classic Japanese ones; Gradius, Salamander, R-Type and so on, I have always felt that Xenon 2 seriously lacked pretty much everything that made a good game. Project X, while being a tad too hard for the masses (and even some schmup veterans) at least, to me, managed to be visually impressive (I think the graphics are gorgeous, most of the time)... and offered at least a few songs compared to Xenon 2's one song... and while I can't say that I think it is a bad shooter, because I think it a pretty nice shooter, I still think it suffered from too long levels that felt more repetative than dynamic. I think this is what often makes me turned off on shooters developed outside of japan, although there is quite some variety to the levels in Project X, so I can't really blame this game suffering THAT much from repetativeness... and I love the bonus stages which even had someone program its own little PD game called Hyperwarp based on them.
Here we go again...