Why are platform games on the Amiga really mediocre?

[Adropac2]

Flashback isn't a platformer in the true sense.It has jumping in it from platform to platform but it's movement is grid based in similar way to Tomb Raider

[Dan Locke]

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

I really wonder if you actually played Flashback.

I have, extensively. The item puzzles are essentially a far more complicated version of the key-and-lock combinations in other games - they're a way to get further into the levels. You spend far more time running, jumping, rolling, and shooting than you do manipulating items. And what about the courier and escort missions (to say nothing of the Death Tower competition) in New Washington? Does the game suddenly become a platformer when you're playing through those?

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

Makes a 75 to 95 percent change for me. Turrican 1 is far from being garbage.

Whatever floats your boat.

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

Oh and I never got stuck on the scenery in Turrican 1. Guess I'm just lucky then.

Maybe I was thinking of the far buggier C64 version; it's been a while since I played it. Everything else still applies, though.

Originally Posted by Adropac2

Flashback isn't a platformer in the true sense.It has jumping in it from platform to platform but it's movement is grid based in similar way to Tomb Raider

So what is it then? A board game? And that's the exact same movement system that Prince of Persia employs.

I suppose that Gods isn't a platformer either because you can't jump vertically?

[TCD]

Originally Posted by Dan Locke

I have, extensively. The item puzzles are essentially a far more complicated version of the key-and-lock combinations in other games - they're a way to get further into the levels. You spend far more time running, jumping, rolling, and shooting than you do manipulating items. And what about the courier and escort missions in New Washington?

Yes, yes I see how that is in Prince of Persia now...

Originally Posted by Dan Locke

Whatever floats your boat.

For sure. Hope I never find out what floats yours

Originally Posted by Dan Locke

So what is it then? A board game? And that's the exact same movement system that Prince of Persia employs.

Wait... does that mean every game that uses a button to fire a weapon is like Contra? Heck! Then it's a Contra/Prince of Persia/Zelda clone! I never thought about it that way.

[Adropac2]

Well i would say that the term platformer came about at a time when you had things like Manic Miner.Most machines have there fair share of pure platformer in the sense these games have you jumping from one platform to another and despite various other elements, they all tend to fall into this rule

Indeed Gods, Prince Persia, Flashback are not what i would class in this exact category.They do involve jumping but the start stop nature and other things are the difference here and it's a bigger difference for example than if you were to include some puzzle aspects into a pure platformer - it would still be that pure platformer but with other elements

You could always say it falls into a platform category that is not the one originally termed is how i would see it

[Retro-Nerd]

1. Flashback, Prince of Persia or Gods are more Action Adventures than platformer.

2. Neither the Amiga or C64 Turrican versions are bugged. The level design is a bit flawed at the end of the game, not more. And the exploration aspect define both games (Turrican 1+2). Turrican 3/Mega Turrican is way too linear, mainly running from left to right. Typical console style, boring. Contra is far better in this category.

[Marlon]

Originally Posted by Adropac2

does it really serve any purpose saying things a certain way as to possibly annoy or upset

This is clearly what he DOES want to do, though. It's in insecurity/over-compensating thing; don't let it bug you. Dismissing these people always winds them up more than getting involved...

[Adropac2]

I discovered a while back i guess from many years at the keyboard on various forums like this, that it doesn't pay any to get upset if you can so help it - i try to avoid silly confrontations these days

I did want to answer what was being said but hopefully it was in a calm manner

[Dan Locke]

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

Yes, yes I see how that is in Prince of Persia now...

I'm not saying that at all. What I am saying is that "platformer" is an incredibly broad category, covering everything from Pitfall to LittleBigPlanet. Saying that a game isn't a platformer because it includes item-based puzzles doesn't make sense at all.

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

For sure. Hope I never find out what floats yours

Lots of stuff, much of it on the Amiga.

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

Wait... does that mean every game that uses a button to fire a weapon is like Contra? Heck! Then it's a Contra/Prince of Persia/Zelda clone! I never thought about it that way.

That was completely incomprehensible. If a genre is based on its movement setup, then games that are based on that setup will be within it. Same thing with horizontal shoot-em-ups and Breakout clones (for lack of a better term) - Enforcer's powerup scheme doesn't make it a clone of Turrican any more than Act Out's orientation makes it a clone of Enforcer. The former is a shoot-em-up, the latter is a Breakout clone, both have their own genres.

Originally Posted by Adropac2

Indeed Gods, Prince Persia, Flashback are not what i would class in this exact category.

My point is that it's a very broad category, essentially covering any side-view 2D game with a ground-bound protagonist who can jump. Super Metroid is a far cry from Super Mario Bros., but they're much more similar to each other than they are to Star Fox.

Originally Posted by Adropac2

They do involve jumping but the start stop nature and other things are the difference here and it's a bigger difference for example than if you were to include some puzzle aspects into a pure platformer - it would still be that pure platformer but with other elements

Originally Posted by Adropac2

You could always say it falls into a platform category that is not the one originally termed is how i would see it

Well, I don't see how we disagree then.

Originally Posted by Retro-Nerd

2. Neither the Amiga or C64 Turrican versions are bugged.

I'm pretty sure that being able to eliminate enemies by running away from them is a bug. Once they're off the screen, they're gone forever, never to return. I also remember sequence-breaking the C64 version of Turrican II - I somehow managed to get past the wind on the first level without going through the tunnel below the waterfall, and it ended up making the entire level windy. I had to restart.

Originally Posted by Marlon

This is clearly what he DOES want to do, though. It's in insecurity/over-compensating thing; don't let it bug you. Dismissing these people always winds them up more than getting involved...

Oh, come on. I get worked up easily about things that seem very obvious to me; you don't have to get all Freudian like that.

Incidentally, what would I possibly be "over-compensating" for? Or what would I have "insecurity" about? And, of all of the outlets for such nonexistent things, why a thread about video games on a forum about a 25-year-old computer? Don't spout meaningless psychobabble without having an actual reason for it.

[Adropac2]

The thing is most people including me wont use the term in a broad sense.To me a platform game is what it was originally termed to mean and if a game has jumping in it, i don't then always call it a platformer

Something like Metroid is what i would consider a adventure platformer/shooter but it's the general jumping movement that has me deciding the platformer part.Were it the same game but closer to how Flashback manages to climb and jump around, then for me this part just wouldn't feel like a platformer in the true old sense.I could at that point easily say it does fall into this broad category but most people don't refer to this anyway

[Dan Locke]

Originally Posted by Adropac2

The thing is most people including me wont use the term in a broad sense.

Apparently, "most people" doesn't include every major game database that I've ever visited.

Originally Posted by Adropac2

To me a platform game is what it was originally termed to mean and if a game has jumping in it, i don't then always call it a platformer

In that case, the only thing that you conceivably could call a platformer would be a single-screen, arcade-style game circa 1983. Such games were the first to have the "platformer" name attached to them by game magazines and the general public, and they would be the type that the name was "originally termed to mean".

Originally Posted by Adropac2

Something like Metroid is what i would consider a adventure platformer/shooter but it's the general jumping movement that has me deciding the platformer part.Were it the same game but closer to how Flashback manages to climb and jump around, then for me this part just wouldn't feel like a platformer in the true old sense.I could at that point easily say it does fall into this broad category but most people don't refer to this anyway

Funny that you say "most people" again, because I haven't seen a time when it hasn't been referred to as such, except by you.

[Adropac2]

I think you might be better off having this argument with yourself

Games fall into this broad category yes but while clearly we understand this, it's not something everyone refers to.Of course every major database is going to use this system as it would hardly be very proffesional otherwise

The term platformer can and will be of course used for even earlier games but i wont be using it on the basis that i don't care to - i suppose if i wanted to be technically correct i might do

I don't class less standard jumping games as a platformers because i myself only bother with the reference when refering to the game's the original term was coined for

If someone was to put words in my mouth then i might declare that only games like Manic Miner are in fact defined as platformers but i'm not saying that here

I personally like to refer to platformers as the ones that started with Manic Miner types and carried over to the many more on console etc.I don't tend to refer to other platformer types of games that feature the jumping aspect, as platformers, even though they fall into that broad category - lol obviously

So yes all these games that feature the theme of jumping in an enviroment can and should be labelled in the broader sense a platformer if you're to be technical about it, but people have their own label and it's these people tend to use more

[Dan Locke]

Whatever. I've given up on trying to understand your position.

[Adropac2]

I see

[TCD]

Originally Posted by Dan Locke

So, while Prince of Persia is a platformer, Flashback isn't? Despite the fact that they're almost exactly the same game, but with a gun instead of a sword in the latter? What am I missing here?

Originally Posted by Dan Locke

I'm not saying that at all. What I am saying is that "platformer" is an incredibly broad category, covering everything from Pitfall to LittleBigPlanet. Saying that a game isn't a platformer because it includes item-based puzzles doesn't make sense at all.

That is the part I was referring to. Of course 'platformer' is a wide category, but (at least for me) Prince of Persia and Flashback are quite different. That Flashback copies the jump mechanism from Prince of Persia, doesn't make it almost the same game.

Originally Posted by Dan Locke

That was completely incomprehensible. If a genre is based on its movement setup, then games that are based on that setup will be within it. Same thing with horizontal shoot-em-ups and Breakout clones (for lack of a better term) - Enforcer's powerup scheme doesn't make it a clone of Turrican any more than Act Out's orientation makes it a clone of Enforcer. The former is a shoot-em-up, the latter is a Breakout clone, both have their own genres.

Nope, I was just trying to follow your logic here.

[Hungry Horace]

Originally Posted by Dan Locke

Oh, come on. I get worked up easily about things that seem very obvious to me; you don't have to get all Freudian like that.

Incidentally, what would I possibly be "over-compensating" for? Or what would I have "insecurity" about? And, of all of the outlets for such nonexistent things, why a thread about video games on a forum about a 25-year-old computer? Don't spout meaningless psychobabble without having an actual reason for it.

I think the point is you are taking your opinion as an absolute truth. what "seems obvious to you" clearly is not worth getting "worked up about", because it is subjective opinion. (and you can argue that until you are blue in the face if you like, claiming to have a "better" opinion due to numbers of games played, forums visited etc etc, but it's still a fact)

However, your opinion is not gospel, and it can seem like you are trying to grind other people into the ground with it, which obviously certain people are not going to take to too kindly.

recall your own response to something similar on LemonAmiga;

Originally Posted by HoraceAndTheSpider

I'm not looking to say Dan that all of your criticism is unjust, but I do feel you've gone a bit OTT with some aspects.

Originally Posted by Dan Locke

Perhaps. I tend to do that.

[Marlon]

Originally Posted by Hungry Horace

I think the point is you are taking your opinion as an absolute truth. what "seems obvious to you" clearly is not worth getting "worked up about", because it is subjective opinion.

THIS. Exactly this. Dan, subjective opinion is just that; subjective. You cannot win this argument, not in the way you seem to need to because, and this is important, people have their own opinions, and neither you nor anyone else has a right to say these opinions are wrong just because they differ from your own.

DO YOU SEE?

And at the end of the day, arguing angrily over what can be classified as a 'platformer' is pretty pointless, doncherthink? But if labels matter to you THAT much, then you need to start considering sub-genres, such as "platform shoot-em-up".

[Jonathan Drain]

The Amiga had great platformers (Soccer Kid, Turrican, Superfrog to name a few). It just didn't have the most famous platformers: Mario, Sonic, and Metroid. It had clones but none of the big names.

[Dan Locke]

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

That is the part I was referring to. Of course 'platformer' is a wide category, but (at least for me) Prince of Persia and Flashback are quite different. That Flashback copies the jump mechanism from Prince of Persia, doesn't make it almost the same game.

I understand completely; the comparison was based entirely on the movesets because they're the vehicle for the player's interaction with the game, and a game is nothing if not interaction. I'll agree that the games' emphases are completely different.

Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid

Nope, I was just trying to follow your logic here.

It looked an awful lot more like an attempt to set up a straw man. It still does.

Originally Posted by Hungry Horace

I think the point is you are taking your opinion as an absolute truth. what "seems obvious to you" clearly is not worth getting "worked up about", because it is subjective opinion. (and you can argue that until you are blue in the face if you like, claiming to have a "better" opinion due to numbers of games played, forums visited etc etc, but it's still a fact)

True.

Originally Posted by Hungry Horace

However, your opinion is not gospel, and it can seem like you are trying to grind other people into the ground with it, which obviously certain people are not going to take to too kindly.

I see. I'll keep that in mind in the future.

Originally Posted by Marlon

THIS. Exactly this. Dan, subjective opinion is just that; subjective. You cannot win this argument, not in the way you seem to need to because, and this is important, people have their own opinions, and neither you nor anyone else has a right to say these opinions are wrong just because they differ from your own.

DO YOU SEE?

Yes; I do, now.

Originally Posted by Marlon

And at the end of the day, arguing angrily over what can be classified as a 'platformer' is pretty pointless, doncherthink?

Quite. It annoys me that I can get so worked up over trivial things like that.

I apologize for any offense on my part.

[TCD]

Originally Posted by Dan Locke

It looked an awful lot more like an attempt to set up a straw man. It still does.

Well, it seems to me you were defining games upon one element in it and it still does. I mocked about it, but seems like I just should have mentioned that it's utter bs to compare games on one control element

[Dastardly]

I have to agree with Adropac in that I also don't consider Gods, Flashback etc to be pure platformers. For me, a pure platformer (like Mario World) has it's emphasis on the mechanic of jumping skillfully between platforms. This mechanic gradually gets more and more difficult as the game progresses. In a game like Gods or Flashback, this is not what the emphasis of the game is based on. Of course there are 'platforms', but they are more about building an environment for you to explore. The jumping between platforms in Gods is no more difficult at the end of the game than it is at the beginning.

Genres aren't always black and white. There are grey areas.