View Single Post
Old 29 June 2008, 11:55   #80
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: asteroid belt
Posts: 273
Thanks a lot for the explanation and information, Galahad. I'm not technically adept: I just go by what I see, hear and feel with games.

And tho' X2 has less colours, it seems to have more, to me. And that is the result of a gifted graphician who knew how to place pixels and maximise limited palettes, as you alluded.

Edit: my question about BS parallax was sarcastic. Sorry about that!

Originally Posted by Codetapper View Post
Battle Squadron also features that awesome almost-invisible fighter effect (some blitter trick no doubt) and games where you can destroy the scenery always get extra points in my book! Battle Squadron is very smooth, has a large playing area and feels like an arcade game. Xenon 2 doesn't!

It would have been interesting what kind of graphics Mark Coleman could have done if he'd worked on Battle Squadron!
You're speaking of the cloaking effect, there? That impressed (and creeped me out) also. But you can destroy the scenery in X2... or is this some other technicality where the scenery is not the scenery...

X2 felt to me like an Amiga game, and an arcade game - a hybrid. Some would say it fails at both - I doubt they all said it in '89.
oneshotdead is offline  
Page generated in 0.03877 seconds with 10 queries