>> >I still think that Warlords is a game that needs to be rewritten.
>
>> Why? Isn't it great as-is?
>
>It's good when it could have been great. The ball physics suck and there
>aren't enough degrees of rotation. I hear the arcade version is vastly
>superior.
Well, I *finally* got to play the arcade version about a month or so ago,
and I have a copy that runs on MAME (an arcade emulator) and I am not sure
what you mean by "not enough degrees of rotation"...the shields move the
same in the 2600 and the arcade version (as far as I can tell)...
The main differences with the arcade version are:
1) snazzier graphics -- the castles are more elaborate graphically, the ball
is actually a flaming ball, that starts by being spit out by a dragon, etc.
2) when the shield "catches" the fireball, the ball spits out little flames
that damage your castle for as long as you hold it
3) when a warlord is killed, it turns into a fireball, meaning there are
multiple flameballs at once (also I believe balls randomly appear during
the game as well)
A lot of this is probably beyond the 2600's capabilities (or at least
at the time of 2600 Warlords it was...it still may be VERY hard to implement
it, and of course the better graphics is something you really can't do too
much about)
--
Archives updated once/day at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/
Unsubscribing and other info at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/stella.html
