Yeah, it's on one of the Taito collections for PS2.Originally Posted by Nikademus1969
Speaking of home games that are different from arcade games, I just learned *today* that Journey Escape is not the same game as the Journey arcade game.
Yeah, it's on one of the Taito collections for PS2.
Speaking of home games that are different from arcade games, I just learned *today* that Journey Escape is not the same game as the Journey arcade game.
[QUOTE=PingvinBlueJeans;1494652]Major Havoc and Spider-Man come to mind.
QUOTE]
Yes. That Goddamn SEGA Spider-Man game. Not only was that good and it never got released on consoles, and it was fairly hard for me to find in arcades and I was never able to find it on emulator. Such a great game
My deviantart page:http://emceelokey.deviantart.com/
My Trade List: http://www.digitpress.com/forum/show...ferrerid=21761
Hmm - Every classic arcade game I can think of that I enjoyed was released on consoles. Whether or not the release was good enough, in my opinion, is debatable, but the original question specifically asked for titles that were never released in a console version.
The less common arcade games that I liked a lot might be fairly uncommon in home versions, but exist -
Star Castle, Marble Madness & Pleiades come to mind.
I definitely second the mention of the environmental Discs of Tron above. I loved that game, and spent a huge amount of time during my sophomore or junior year of high school playing that game with a friend of mine, just about every morning before class and during lunch most days. I'd forgotten aboout that game altogether.
As for Satan's Hollow, I don't recall who, but I think it was an AA regular, released a bunch of repro cartridges for the 5200. These were games that were either unreleased prototypes, or maybe conversions from 8-bit releases. Among the titles was a Satan's Hollow that plays, looks, and sounds great, but unfortunately crashes frequently. I've got it, and until it crashes it's a blast to play.
I don't understand how people can even say that "anything" released "after the crash" (1983) is not classic. Are you freaking kidding me? Super Mario Bros is not classic? I'm sorry, I respect Atari/Colecovision/AStrocade/INtellivision/insert other systems here, but that's plain naive. Eventually it's going to happen. You think Guns N Roses from 1986-87 just started playing on the "classic" rock stations lately for no reason? They will become classic. They will become vintage. It's a matter of time. The better way is to filter it like comic book do. The "Golden" Age of Video Gaming, the "Silver" age, stuff like that.
Simpsons was also released on PC, but it's hard to imagine it as a stand alone compilation game because it's just not available and would have to be combined with some crazy licensing agreement....
I wish Mikie would have come out on console. I love that game. There's a LOT of Konami stuff not released on console. Missing in Action? Boot Camp?
I kind of dug Beezer, and was bummed when the Intellivision version wasn't released, but I'm not sure it was actually a "classic"/great game.
Russ Perry Jr, 2175 S Tonne Dr #114, Arlington Hts IL 60005
Got any obscure game stuff?
IMO it's not classic in the way that Space Invaders and Pac Man are.
Eventually what's going to happen? If some people don't consider a console that's 20 years old a classic, you think another 20 years is going to make a difference?
But not in the same way as The Beatles or Elvis or other bands and artists that were there at the beginning of rock and roll.
So would that break down something like this?
Golden Age = VCS, O2, Intellivsion etc
Silver Age = NES, SMS, etc
Bronze Age = Genesis, SNES, etc
Where do we go from there? When the PSX and Saturn are 20-30 years old, do we come up with another precious metal since those systems will be considered "classic"? When does it end?
If we are going to use some kind of time stamp, does that mean the CD-I, Pippin, and FM Towns Marty become "classic" simply because time has passed?
Mikie kicks ass, pun intended. Pretty sure Boot Camp came out for the C64, granted, it's not a console.
Marble Madness has had a ton of home console releases: NES, Game Gear, Genesis, SMS, GB, GBC, GBA... and it also came out on all the home computers of the day too.
Kid Ice: The Famicom (NES) came out in Japan in 1983, so if you are putting Intellivision in there, NES definitely needs to be there.
And you know it's not the same thing. To call the NES "silver age" when IT is the very reason video games are what they are today is ridiculous. It came out around the same time as Coleco/Intellivision, but in Japan. It "saved" the video game market. As much as I respect the previous systems, Nintendo actually put arcade games on a home console (graphically anything from the VS. Unisystem series)
The Intellivision came out in the U.S. in 1979. The NES came out in the U.S. in, what, 85 86? They're not even in the same generation of consoles.
I agree the NES saved the video game market...after that first generation of "classic" consoles was finished.
If you want to go by Japan/Famicom, you could very well say it was the first classic console...in Japan.
I don't know how you guys can have any sort of argument about what is classic or not here. The official DP definition is right there on the forum listing, and it is "Today, classic means 'before PlayStation 2'"
Kid ICe: Famicom architecture is 1983. It came out in 1983. Therefore it is classic. At this rate, the 5200 should not be classic. If the NES took 2 years to get to the USA, so be it, it still came out in 1983. Heck, the Colecovision came out in 1982.
Last edited by DreamTR; 01-17-2009 at 02:59 PM.
You're right. I was just giving my personal opinion.
It's not relevant to Adam's question anyway.
That is just to clearly differentiate between what topics get posted in Modern gaming, or Classic Gaming forums.
The "Classic Gaming" forum used to be for every single game of every single era, however it became too crowded. It was decided to split the modern gaming off into its own forum.
If you look at the description for the Modern Gaming forum, you will see "As we always say: it doesn't have to be OLD to be CLASSIC."
I think the whole "nothing after the crash is 'classic'" argument only exists because gamers that are old enough that they were children/teenagers prior to the crash are highly nostalgic about the games they grew up with, so they look at everything that came later with some level of disdain. And the easiest way to reflect that is by denying everything else the term "classic", as if they're a lesser form of gaming.
Really, I think it's all silly. If this was still the 80s or even possibly the 90s, there might be some argument there, but when we're talking games that are all 25+ years old, is a difference of maybe 5 years at the most really night and day? Is a 1982 launch Colecovision game that different from a 1983 launch Famicom game? One is "classic" and the other isn't?
It's like looking at two elderly men, one 75 and the other 70, and saying "Man, that guy is old!" about the 75-year-old and "He's practically a baby!" about the 70-year-old.
I don't look at anything with disdain. I just said the NES is responsible for the comeback of gaming. My biggest collection is for the 3DO. My favorite system is the Playstation. I own all 3 current consoles and a DS and a PSP.
Don't we have to draw the line somewhere? Or is every single game ever made going to become a classic, after say, 20 years? I just said the Playstation is my all time favorite system. Having said that, in my eyes, it will never be a classic system. It's not about greater and lesser, it's about classic or not classic.
Yes it is, because there was a clearly defined period of time in the U.S. when there was no video gaming, as it had been dismissed as a fad. Why should it matter to me what was going on in Japan?
Now who's being silly? Who in 1983 was playing a Famicom game in this country?
Come up with all the analogies about old men and Guns n Roses you want. Look at any credible piece of literature about the history of gaming. You'll find that the NES is separated into a different era than the 2600, Intellivision, Colecovision, etc. Now if you feel the NES is a classic console, that's absolutely fine with me....although I disagree, I'm probably in the minority. But don't try this "the Famicom was released in Japan in 1983 so it's a contemporary of the Colecovision". It doesn't make sense, it has nothing or little to do with the U.S. gaming scene, and it's not even particularly relevant to this argument.
I've got to say that I agree with Kid Ice in this discussion. I'll try to explain why I feel the same way, and maybe it will illuminate things.
Having grown up in the '70s and '80s, I was there when videogames really got their start. I played Pong & Breakout in movie theatre lobbies, Death Race 2000 was in a hometown pizza parlor, and once I played Air Sea Battle on a friend's VCS, there was no force on earth that would prevent me eventually owning a VCS.
Kids of my generation endlessly debated whether the VCS or the Intellivision was the better system, and we all felt a little bit sorry for the kid with the Odyssey2.
Videogames changed between the Colecovision/5200 and the NES/SMS. With the emergence of the NES/SMS and later games, the games didn't look the same, play the same, or feel the same.
There is a definite break in style. To me, that is why the earlier systems 'feel' classic, and everything that comes afterward doesn't.
This ISN'T a qualitative judgement, and it cannot be measured. It's simply a feeling. The games from the era I'm considering classic usually don't have multiple screens. There are very minimal stories - usually the only story is on the cabinet facade, control panel, or bezel, or an intro screen before the game begins. The primary objective is to score as high as possible, and live as long as possible before losing all of your lives. Many of the games, if not most, have comparatively small player characters, and the background is usually solid black. Hand-eye coordination is paramount.
'Continues' spoil the challenge. There aren't save locations. Usually there isn't a Boss to take on. There is rarely any sort of plot to work through. These games don't really have an ending, and you never really win.
After the NES hit the scene, things changed. There were more involved and relevant storylines, background graphics came into their own, you could continue so you didn't lose your progress, and you could actually beat a game, eventually seeing an ending. It seems to me that hand-eye coordination mattered less (excepting 'shmups', and btw I hate that word!). Players didn't really pay much attention to score, if the game even tracked score.
So, at least to me, there is a definite difference between what I, and I'm guessing Kid Ice, consider a 'classic', and what I would consider post-classic. It isn't a function of age or quality. I like the Dreamcast as much as I like the Atari 5200, but I wouldn't call the DC a classic. (Those are my 2 favorite systems.)
My buddy had a game where you ride on a train.
At the start you can pick your weapon. whip,punch or gun. You got the most points per kill with gun. When you punched someone they would slide back and anyone hit by then also died. Anyone know the name?
Aliens vs Predator - CPS2
Progear no Arashi - CPS2
Scud Race - Model 3
BuyAtari: that almost sounds like Renegade!
NoahsmyBro: You said it. You "grew up in the 70s", and that was your basis for the argument. I'm 33 years old. I'm an arcade rat, I was playing Pac-Man back when I was 4 years old and continually went to arcades obsessively in the 80s. What were the most incredible looking games at the time? Nintendo games. VS Unisystem games were amazing to me, and when were those released? About 1983-84. These were already out on Famicom in Japan, but for some reason we can consider Colecovision a classic, the Atari 5200 a classic, and to almost everyone else, the 7800 probably falls under that as well, but the NES? Oh no. It's "neo" classic. 23 years in the US and 26 years worldwide and it's a NEO CLASSIC? That's just being silly not grouping them together. Most of the Atari heads just don't like Nintendo because they did not grow up with it. I grew up with all of this stuff, and my first system was an Astrocade. I chose NOT to get a 2600 because after playing it at my cousin's house, nothing stood up to the arcade. Colecovision was fun, but even then.....I just don't see the difference in 3 years of a system being RELEASED in the USA, and less than a year when a system is released worldwide turns it into a Neo Classic system.
What's classic or not is about as pointless an argument as defining what punk is--it's entirely subjective. Of course people who grew up in the early 80's aren't going to look a newer systems as classics, any more than people who grew up in the 50's look at films made in the 70's and 80's as classics.
Now, if you want to classify "classic" games as games before the crash, that's no different than calling them "golden age." And as for people running out of metallic names, comics have been around a heck of a lot longer than video games, but they use that classification quite well.
Posting Permissions
FTC Disclosure Notices:
This site contains affiliate links for which I may be compensated. As an eBay Partner, I may be compensated if you make a purchase.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Similar agreements apply to other advertising or affiliate programs such as those from Google, etc.
Copyright © 1991 - Present Digital Press. All rights reserved.
Reply With Quote
