Koopa64 | 62 Posted September 30 Share Posted September 30 Exhibit A: Castlequest (NES) Exhibit B: Mystery Quest (NES) Exhibit C : Hydlide (NES) Please add more exhibits to the hall of deceit. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Rothchild | 9,977 Editorials Team · Posted September 30 Share Posted September 30 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webhead123 | 759 Posted September 30 Share Posted September 30 (edited) 2 hours ago, Reed Rothchild said: Oh, man. This one's made even worse by the fact that the arcade original was actually pretty good (for its time). Edited September 30 by Webhead123 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webhead123 | 759 Posted September 30 Share Posted September 30 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulpa | 3,742 Posted September 30 Share Posted September 30 I'm just going to post the entire first party library for the Atari 2600 and leave it at that. The most egregious was Flag Capture. Flag Capture - Wikipedia 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webhead123 | 759 Posted October 1 Share Posted October 1 3 hours ago, Tulpa said: I'm just going to post the entire first party library for the Atari 2600 and leave it at that. The most egregious was Flag Capture. Flag Capture - Wikipedia There is some absolute bangin' cover art for Atari games but I didn't really go down that rabbit hole because, considering the limitations, I think relatively few of them end up as outright "bad" games. Maybe not terribly enticing or intuitive for modern audiences, sure, but not "bad" per se. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fox | 1,779 Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 Cover is so good you think it could be to a Batman comic. Miss Piggy is smoldering. Too bad it is just a jank mini game collection. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanooki | 5,151 Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 (edited) I know an instant strike on this one... look no further than the TSR D&D lore here, and I guess given how hated TSR may stand for TURDS STORED on ROMS. Heroes of the Lance, Pool of Radiance, Dragonstrike, and Hillsfar. The art is just awesome, likely (I'm not going to fact check this) stolen from the older PC or some fantasy novel or D&D guide/expansion box/book art as it's just stunning. The games are stunningly shit and serviceable at least on 2 is semi-generous. These just look solid, games, solid something alright...flush... The other and I don't get it other than when I talk to people it's a lack of understanding HOW to control the game than the game being bad, but Silent Service is another and that's just an epic piece of WW2 box art. Edited October 9 by Tanooki 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalterWhiteJr. | 1,205 Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 This is a great topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wongojack | 329 Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 49 minutes ago, Tanooki said: I know an instant strike on this one... look no further than the TSR D&D lore here, and I guess given how hated TSR may stand for TURDS STORED on ROMS. Heroes of the Lance, Pool of Radiance, Dragonstrike, and Hillsfar. The art is just awesome, likely (I'm not going to fact check this) stolen from the older PC or some fantasy novel or D&D guide/expansion box/book art as it's just stunning. The games are stunningly shit and serviceable at least on 2 is semi-generous. These just look solid, games, solid something alright...flush... "The games are stunningly shit and serviceable at least on 2 is semi-generous." I don't understand this sentence, but you've made your opinion clear. You don't like these D&D games What exactly do you think is bad about these games? Is this a genre mismatch for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_wizard_666 | 1,337 Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 2 hours ago, wongojack said: "The games are stunningly shit and serviceable at least on 2 is semi-generous." I don't understand this sentence, but you've made your opinion clear. You don't like these D&D games What exactly do you think is bad about these games? Is this a genre mismatch for you? Dragonstrike - I was disappointed with this as a kid because I saw "D&D" and expected "RPG." It's a decent shooter with a ton of depth. I recommend it, though it's no cakewalk. Heroes of the Lance - decent once you figure out how it works, but the controls are a bitch to adapt to. Almost no replay value. Even though I personally like it, I have a hard time recommending it. Hillsfar - This wasn't even meant to be a stand alone game. The PC version was essentially just a way to balance/build levels between games. You were meant to import characters from other D&D releases, then export them again. As such, there's little depth to it, and not much to do. It's like taking a side quest and stretching it out to 40 hours. Absolutely terrible, though the replay value is stupidly high due to having four unique storylines to play through (all of which play out exactly the same). Pool of Radiance - My personal favourite of the bunch. On the PC it was the first of four full length RPGs that were meant to be played through in sequence. I believe they intended to make this the case on the NES but it never came to fruition. Too bad, because it's a solid port overall. It's one of the better western style RPGs on the system...though the number of people who actually enjoy that style is relatively small. It's closer to Wizardry or Ultima than Final Fantasy or Dragon Quest. While I disagree that they're shit, they were all designed with PC gamers in mind. At the time, PC and console gamers were vastly different in age, tastes, and patience, so the games that did well on one medium didn't do so well on the other. The inclusion of Silent Service on his list actually furthers this point a bit, as it was yet another popular PC game that was ported to the NES. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guillavoie | 1,232 Events Team · Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 I like these kind of topics and what people come up with, but I can't help to tell myself at the same time : is it really surprising? Of course the marketing side in producing video games will come up with the most exciting cover to sell their product, no matter what the game is, and how good or not it is. No marketing team will think ''this video game actually sucks, so we should market it as such in order to be honest with the consumers'', haha! So yes, I do expect the most out of this world cover art to be tied to the best games, just as much as the most unplayable thing on any console. The reverse angle of it could be interesting too, like : which awesome games have the worst cover art. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaia Gensouki | 1,118 Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 I can understand that some of the D&D games on the NES are divisive and maybe not the best, but Pool of Radiance is the one exception, imho. I thought it was a pretty deep and huge RPG and the fact, that they got to run it on the NES, which wasn't designed for games like these, is quite the achievement. The only thing I didn't like was that the battles took seemingly forever. The Dragon Quest/Warriors games are a more fast-paced by comparison. I'm probably also on of the few weirdos who actually likes Hydlide. In Japan it's even celebrated as one of the classics, together with Dragon Slayer and Mugen no Shinzou, iirc. But it also released in 1984 for Japanese home computers and the Famicom port was from 1986. So it's understandable that it wouldn't wow NES gamers in 1989. But to straight up call it bad … Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbd39 | 2,115 Posted October 9 Share Posted October 9 The infamous cover of Ironsword deceives you into thinking that Kuros is a brawny warrior with a powerful sword and not some goofy little knight with a useless sword that he wiggles in a futile manner. There was a bunch of this kind of thing on Atari 2600. The primitive games often would not live up to the box art. A prime example is Imagic's Firefighter. OMG, doesn't it look exciting and fun? Trust me it's not. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wongojack | 329 Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 20 hours ago, the_wizard_666 said: Dragonstrike - I was disappointed with this as a kid because I saw "D&D" and expected "RPG." It's a decent shooter with a ton of depth. I recommend it, though it's no cakewalk. Heroes of the Lance - decent once you figure out how it works, but the controls are a bitch to adapt to. Almost no replay value. Even though I personally like it, I have a hard time recommending it. Hillsfar - This wasn't even meant to be a stand alone game. The PC version was essentially just a way to balance/build levels between games. You were meant to import characters from other D&D releases, then export them again. As such, there's little depth to it, and not much to do. It's like taking a side quest and stretching it out to 40 hours. Absolutely terrible, though the replay value is stupidly high due to having four unique storylines to play through (all of which play out exactly the same). Pool of Radiance - My personal favourite of the bunch. On the PC it was the first of four full length RPGs that were meant to be played through in sequence. I believe they intended to make this the case on the NES but it never came to fruition. Too bad, because it's a solid port overall. It's one of the better western style RPGs on the system...though the number of people who actually enjoy that style is relatively small. It's closer to Wizardry or Ultima than Final Fantasy or Dragon Quest. While I disagree that they're shit, they were all designed with PC gamers in mind. At the time, PC and console gamers were vastly different in age, tastes, and patience, so the games that did well on one medium didn't do so well on the other. The inclusion of Silent Service on his list actually furthers this point a bit, as it was yet another popular PC game that was ported to the NES. Right, these 4 games are all quite different. Seems strange to lump them together and call them all sh!+. I mean, I'm sure that Tanooki could tell us things he doesn't like about them, but it takes a broad brush to paint them all with shit at the same time. Also, are we talking about the NES versions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMR | 546 Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 (edited) Deadly Towers. I really wanted to like this game, but there were some really bad design decisions that made that impossible. It's mainly the collision and hit detection. There are screens where if you enter them from the wrong direction you will die. I even tried playing this game with invincibility using game genie codes. It was still impossible. It's a shame. Thematically, I think the game is pretty cool. Execution, however, was miserable. Edited October 10 by CMR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webhead123 | 759 Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 13 hours ago, CMR said: Deadly Towers. Yeah, I started to put this one up yesterday but I got sidetracked. The cover art prepares you for an epic, ass-kicking fantasy adventure. Sadly, the game itself is an absolute turd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RH | 5,250 Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 On 10/9/2024 at 9:39 AM, mbd39 said: The infamous cover of Ironsword deceives you into thinking that Kuros is a brawny warrior with a powerful sword and not some goofy little knight with a useless sword that he wiggles in a futile manner. There was a bunch of this kind of thing on Atari 2600. The primitive games often would not live up to the box art. A prime example is Imagic's Firefighter. OMG, doesn't it look exciting and fun? Trust me it's not. Let's be clear--pulling out any Atari 2600 (or other, earlier title) is like bringing a gun to a knife fight with this topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-type | 2,840 Posted October 10 Share Posted October 10 On 10/9/2024 at 9:39 AM, mbd39 said: Imagic box art was a little different from the other Atari art.. first you had the silver boxes... they also tended to take photos of actual toys and models... this cover is obviously a toy firetruck with some real flames in the foreground. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wongojack | 329 Posted October 11 Share Posted October 11 Games from this thread on sale now. Enjoy their box art for a low low price: https://store.steampowered.com/app/1882280/Forgotten_Realms_The_Archives__Collection_Two/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanooki | 5,151 Posted October 11 Share Posted October 11 @wongojack And for those who follow his link -- get this, it's free and been worked on a great many years https://gbc.zorbus.net/ That little gem brings the games up to a less stuffy front to work on modern computers while not having so many of the crippling designs of the time, along with other aides like mapping built in vs on paper. You can enable or not what you want to add to it so it's not a hack job. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_wizard_666 | 1,337 Posted October 11 Share Posted October 11 On 10/9/2024 at 8:13 PM, wongojack said: Right, these 4 games are all quite different. Seems strange to lump them together and call them all sh!+. I mean, I'm sure that Tanooki could tell us things he doesn't like about them, but it takes a broad brush to paint them all with shit at the same time. Also, are we talking about the NES versions? Yeah, I've played all the NES versions, and that's what I was referring to. I was just saying how Hillsfar never should've been ported in the first place. All the D&D games were originally released on the PC, and that PC gamers at the time had different tastes than console gamers, and that likely contributed to the skewed reception some games of that ilk had on the NES. Although SIlent Service is common enough to think that it was well received back in the day 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wongojack | 329 Posted October 11 Share Posted October 11 3 hours ago, Tanooki said: @wongojack And for those who follow his link -- get this, it's free and been worked on a great many years https://gbc.zorbus.net/ That little gem brings the games up to a less stuffy front to work on modern computers while not having so many of the crippling designs of the time, along with other aides like mapping built in vs on paper. You can enable or not what you want to add to it so it's not a hack job. FYI - The Forgotten Realms Archives/Collections include the Gold Box companion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirVillain | 537 Posted October 14 Share Posted October 14 This applies to roughly 85% of the NES library. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Link | 2,889 Posted October 16 Share Posted October 16 On 10/11/2024 at 3:25 PM, the_wizard_666 said: Although SIlent Service is common enough to think that it was well received back in the day This is actually a misconception. It's not common at all. There are only 15-20 copies still in existence, but they are always available because nobody wants the game. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now