|
Post by Arjak on Mar 10, 2005 21:53:58 GMT -5
It IS a LITTLE like Ys, but is it good enough to be in the same league?
|
|
|
Post by FM-77AV on Mar 12, 2005 8:01:39 GMT -5
I disagree, I don't think it's like Ys (except for the battle system which is slightly like the one in Ys). I don't like Hydlide (except for Hydlide Special for Famicom, that one's fairly entertaining). I was going to buy Virtual Hydlide for Sega Saturn, but I changed my mind.. I don't really know what that's like.
|
|
|
Post by Neo Rasa on Mar 15, 2005 0:20:18 GMT -5
I never liked Hydlide much, and Virtual Hydlide on the Saturn is very bad. It was hyped up as being an Elder Scrolls-like game but in the end basically consist of some exceptionally grainy FMV (used for the digitized main character as well) bookending a poorly controlled dungeon hack and slash. The game world itself and the monsters are very bland and empty. It's just no fun.
|
|
|
Post by BlueLander on Mar 21, 2005 17:19:28 GMT -5
I can't stand the NES version of Hydlide. A while ago I read some reviews of the game, all of which said it was the worst game ever made. I've read bad reviews of games I ended up enjoying, so I decided to check the game out anyways. I was determined to find something enjoyable in this game.
But it's just a terrible, terrible game. I don't know if it's the worst game ever, but it's probably one of the worst I've ever played.
I also have the MSX version. It looks almost identical to the NES version, but I actually like it better. I guess I'm more willing to overlook the crappy graphics on the MSX because I know it can't do any better. The NES has no excuse.
|
|
|
Post by BlueLander on Mar 21, 2005 18:31:56 GMT -5
Hydlide is an MSX 1 game, though, which is closer in capabilities to a Colecovision. Its main disadvantage is its poor scrolling capabilities. Very choppy.
I'd put the MSX 2's capabilities around the level of a Sega Master System, perhaps a bit higher. Some games really don't look much better than the NES versions, though. Compare the graphics of Castlevania on the two systems.
|
|
|
Post by FM-77AV on Mar 22, 2005 6:25:40 GMT -5
NES has no excuse? Other than it's from 1984? Tell me one NES game that looks better than Hydlide - from 1984 or earlier, that is.
As for the choppy scrolling of the MSX/MSX2 - that's because it doesn't have hardware scrolling (just like the Sega Saturn - its hardware can't show transparent colors).
|
|
|
Post by BlueLander on Mar 22, 2005 10:07:42 GMT -5
I don't have a list of what Famicom game was released in what year, but when you consider that SMB was released just a year later using the same hardware (no extra MMUs), clearly early Famicom titles are capable of much more. It takes awhile for companies to get a handle of new hardware, but Hydlide was just a lazy port. They ported the MSX version without taking advantage of the new hardware at all.
The MSX 2 is actually just fine at scrolling. Aleste 2 and Space Manbow are both good examples of that. You don't need special scrolling hardware (like a blitter) to get smooth scrolling on many systems. The Atari ST, for example, has no scrolling hardware yet a good programmer can make it scroll fine. The system does have it's fair shair of choppy games, too, though.
The MSX1 probably has the choppiest scrolling of a system from that era. If you've ever played a Colecovision (which is almost idential hardware, btw), you know what to expect. That's not to say there aren't some great games for it, though. Konami churned out a ton of really nice games for it. The Gradius games (as well as Parodius and Salamander) are all really great. I prefer the MSX versions to the NES ones, actually.
|
|