At 09:38 AM 2/27/2001 +0100, you wrote:
With the old perspective I've one big advantage: (Nearly) full-screen
movement freedom of the players. You might for example be able to chase
your oponent around the cactus if you like :-)
That makes it sound like the 1-on-1 combat segment of Archon.
The traditional gunfight games are really not that different from so many
modern "railed" 2D fighting games. They force the opponents to face
eachother. It kinda makes sense, but it is still a constraint.
Remember that Gunfight was one of the very earliest videogames. As such,
the playpattern, while classic, has a lot of room for improvement. Outlaw
had all the features in there, it's just that in quad-width the players
were so big that it was way too easy to hit eachother, IMHO. Certainly
given the 2K limitation and that it has the playfield bitmap in the center,
it's a pretty impressive technical achievement, although not that great to
play. The Astrocade Gunfight was far superior.
I am NOT against flicker, but when your eye is focused primarily on the two
gunfighters facing eachother off, flicker is going to be really
obvious. Flicker is better for games that have fast moving sprites filling
up the screen, constantly overlapping and often becoming solid when
vertically separated. Stargate and Solaris are good examples. You don't
mind so much that it flickers if the payoff is a screen full of activity.
You'd have to do some repositioning whenever reaching a segment border.
Maybe try disassembling Air Sea Battle or Canyon Bomber?
-
Archives (includes files) at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/
Unsub & more at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/
