Author Topic: Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread (Read 3526 times)

Keranu · « **Reply #30 on:** October 06, 2006, 06:02:59 PM »

GUTS, Ranger X might've done a bunch of tricks, but none of them were things that Turbo or SNES games didn't do. For fun, I'll name PCE games that did any trick Ranger X did (at least the ones I can think of in the top of my head):

Fake mutli-layers of parallax - Shape Shifter did this and did a damn fine job, I'd say did an even better job.

3D maps that looked like shit - Falcon had 3d objects that could be comparable and what do you know, they still looked like shit

.

Palette Swapping - Legendary Axe II is one that comes to mind with the title screen if I recall.

The 3D backgrounds in the level 2 boss room - Street Fighter II' used either the same effect or an awfully similar effect for the floors in each level.

Cramming a bunch of sprites on screen - Terraforming is a good choice that comes to mind. I haven't played the game in awhile, but I recall it having just as many sprites on screen as Ranger X. Hell, I think it even suffered less slowdown and possibly flicker.

Graphical effects aren't the only things that make good graphics, the art style is possibly most important. There are some spots in Ranger X that pretty dirty color wise. In fact the other night I was toying around with a screenshot I took of the first level and see what simple color improvements I could do if it was on PCE. Here's a very small update I did:

(Genesis version left, revised PCE version right)

The main thing I did to the screenshot was add two extra colors to the sand hills, and replace that nasty darker color used in the sand with a more appropriate color. Give me some time and I could use and add better color to other things (like the sky) so it could really be cooking. So not only could the PCE do just as good of a job porting Ranger X to it's hardware, but it could give it some major color updating to really make the game look nice.

Keranu · « **Reply #31 on:** October 06, 2006, 06:04:52 PM »

Quote from: "GUTS"

Oh and Keranu, Notvied said that F-22 uses polygons so I win the argument about pre-rendered.

Oh and I said that I hadn't played the game and assumed it was probably just pre-rendered as most 3d console games were back then

. Appaerently Nod also said it looked incredibly shitty and could also be done on PCE, so I think we're split.

Emerald Rocker · « **Reply #32 on:** October 06, 2006, 06:32:45 PM »

Wait, did you just compare an in-game graphical effect to something that one other game does on the title screen?

Keranu · « **Reply #33 on:** October 06, 2006, 06:37:47 PM »

Yes I did. Would you care for an ingame example of palette swapping? I'd be happy to since so many games back then did it. Ok... lets see here... ahh yes the first example that comes to mind is the second leve of the first Legendary Axe with the lava. The lava does some simple palette swapping so it looks like the lava is actually moving, when it's not really. I suppose a better ingame example of palette swapping that could be compared to the palette swapping in level 3 of Ranger X would be the parts in Lords of Thunder when you enter something during a level, like the cave in the water level and it shows the outside part doing a palette swap to darker colors so it looks like Landis is moving away from that area. Hell I was just playing Kabuki Den and it uses a palette swap for when you move closer to and away from a fire.

nodtveidt · « **Reply #34 on:** October 06, 2006, 06:38:55 PM »

Yes, F-22 Interceptor undoubtedly uses a polygonal 3D display and yes, it looks like incredible shit. And again, yes...the PCE could handle this just fine, as could the SNES (with the FX chip, that is...actually, it could do this game better than both with the FX chip but without it, the SNES couldn't handle it at all).

GUTS, I see few programming tricks in Ranger-X. The legacy that is Ranger-X is merely a bunch of hype and smokescreen. It's a pretty cut-and-dry platform-shooter, nothing spectacular, and nothing that hasn't been done scores of times before. For a Genesis game, it's got pretty good graphics. But graphics aren't everything...the game suffers in too many other areas to even make it a contender. If they had spent half the time on control and sound that they spent on visuals, then it would truly have been a masterpiece. The way it is right now...it simply makes good still shots.

What I think the true issue here is that a few fanboys can't come to grips with reality.

Emerald Rocker · « **Reply #35 on:** October 06, 2006, 06:47:31 PM »

That's a pretty authoritative tone for someone who didn't reach the end of level 2.

Keranu · « **Reply #36 on:** October 06, 2006, 06:52:07 PM »

I don't recall any levels past the second doing anything special that the first two levels didn't. I think the last stage with the final boss did some kind of wavey effect in the background, but that's still nothing new to games from the era. Dracula X, Dragon Saber, and Neutopia II are a few PCE games that come to mind that also did that effect

.

nodtveidt · « **Reply #37 on:** October 06, 2006, 06:52:12 PM »

Quote from: "Emerald Rocker"

That's a pretty authoritative tone for someone who didn't reach the end of level 2.

Hit a nerve, did I?

Emerald Rocker · « **Reply #38 on:** October 06, 2006, 06:57:12 PM »

Actually, no. I write a lot more when I'm ANGERED.

Keranu · « **Reply #39 on:** October 06, 2006, 06:59:29 PM »

SORRY, I don't like ROAST PORK!

nodtveidt · « **Reply #40 on:** October 06, 2006, 07:01:32 PM »

Tell ya what, fanboys...all of you...I'll play through the game entirely (if I can stay awake that long) but I'll use a Game Genie code so I can get through the whole game. I'll give a more detailed breakdown then, okay?

Keranu · « **Reply #41 on:** October 06, 2006, 07:04:51 PM »

Nod I didn't like the game when I first played it either and thought it had terrible controls, but I did enjoy it a ton when I got used to the controls (along with figuring some new ones out). You might like it more with six buttons, I dunno. But it doesn't matter, I'd like to hear your sypnosis anyways. I can tell you now though that the rest of the game doesn't do anything new.

Black Tiger · « **Reply #42 on:** October 06, 2006, 07:32:15 PM »

Quote from: "Keranu"

Yes I did. Would you care for an ingame example of palette swapping? I'd be happy to since so many games back then did it. Ok... lets see here... ahh yes the first example that comes to mind is the second leve of the first Legendary Axe with the lava. The lava does some simple palette swapping so it looks like the lava is actually moving, when it's not really. I suppose a better ingame example of palette swapping that could be compared to the palette swapping in level 3 of Ranger X would be the parts in Lords of Thunder when you enter something during a level, like the cave in the water level and it shows the outside part doing a palette swap to darker colors so it looks like Landis is moving away from that area. Hell I was just playing Kabuki Den and it uses a palette swap for when you move closer to and away from a fire.

All the Bosses in Ys I & II do a cool color cycle when they die.

There's a cool waterfall effect in Valis III.

The lava in the second cave of Ys IV.

Dracula X's Dracula Fight uses some color swapping as it transistions between backgrounds.

It's a pretty common effect in 16-bit games, I didn't realize that it was something special, other than the HAM technique I've read about Genesis games using.

Emerald Rocker · « **Reply #43 on:** October 06, 2006, 07:40:27 PM »

Nodtveidt, if you're sure you won't like the game, don't bother playing through it. If you're just looking for graphics to see if they could be done on PCE, then sure, I guess that'll work, but I don't think anyone here (except Keranu) honestly cares about that.

The thing about Ranger-X is this: I fell in love with it when I figured out how it really works, and I was forced to learn the mechanics because I kept dying over and over on level 2. Speeding through Ranger-X with a Game Genie is like guzzling wine; you're supposed to savor the flavor, not see how fast you can get drunk. For example, if you never experiment with the best way to use the cycle (as protection, as a stepping stool, as an automated cannon that you can send out into the middle of enemies while you hide behind rocks) then you're missing out on half the fun.

Black Tiger · « **Reply #44 on:** October 06, 2006, 07:58:16 PM »

I think most "classic" games don't look as good as they really are when you just give them a quick test. Especially when comparing ports.

Which is why I believe so many people love certain TG-16 games they played back in the day, but quickly dismiss other great Turbo/PCE titles only sampled through emulation.

Like how someone coming into the Ys series today for the first time will quickly decide that ramming into enemies isn't fun. Or that Bomberman's battle mode is too simple. Or most chip music in games they aren't familiar with sucks. Or judging graphics based on effects like parallax and resolution instead of the actual art.

Too many people want to judge games by how they compare to the best for a console, instead of just enjoying each title for what they are.

I still enjoy comparing/contrasting games on technical levels. But I don't think that anything but the best sucks. And I think that a majority of classic gaming's "greats" are unfairly kept on a pedestal while equal or better games are labeled average or unoriginal.

Author Topic: Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread (Read 3526 times)

nodtveidt

nodtveidt

nodtveidt