Blockout for the Genesis

12 views
Skip to first unread message

Ken Arromdee

unread,
Jun 24, 1991, 6:28:34 PM6/24/91
to
In article <GINSBURG.91...@rio.cme.nist.gov> gins...@cme.nist.gov (Dylan Ginsburg) writes:
>Perhaps their other games are lacking, but their sports
>games are, imo, the best games available for the Genesis.

I just got Blockout by EA for the Genesis and found it terrible. There is no
music and no background other than a wash of blue (contrast with Tengen's Klax,
for instance, which has both). The graphics are crude, and the blocks rotate
in a somewhat jerky fashion. The only way in which difficulty increases is
for the blocks to come out faster; it is impossible, for instance, to play a
game which progresses by giving you different sized pits and more challenging
sets of blocks as it progresses.

This should have been a _lot_ more like the arcade version*, which had all of
these features, plus bonus rounds. To top it off, the block movement works
differently than the arcade version, which is confusing for players used to
it. (One can reasonably expect most people who played the game at all before
to have probably played it on the arcade version, like I did.)

A complete thumbs down for this game.

* Yes, I know the computer versions came first. Given how bad the game is,
that's not an excuse.
--
"Okay Deus Ex Machina Man--let's see your powers save you now!"
[safe falls on villain]
"Not bad...."
-- Phil Foglio's "What's New", Dragon #75 (correction thanks to Pat Berry)

Kenneth Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
INTERNET: arro...@cs.jhu.edu)

Milton W. Kuo

unread,
Jun 24, 1991, 10:46:12 PM6/24/91
to
In article <10...@emanon.cs.jhu.edu> arro...@cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:

[some stuff deleted]

>I just got Blockout by EA for the Genesis and found it terrible. There is no
>music and no background other than a wash of blue (contrast with Tengen's Klax,
>for instance, which has both). The graphics are crude, and the blocks rotate
>in a somewhat jerky fashion. The only way in which difficulty increases is
>for the blocks to come out faster; it is impossible, for instance, to play a
>game which progresses by giving you different sized pits and more challenging
>sets of blocks as it progresses.

Gee, I'm posting a lot today....

Another LOSER by Electronics Arts. In their quest for fast bucks,
they absolutely ignore the consumer by putting out a game that's just
punishment to play. I saw this game at Babbage's about a week ago and
just laughed at it. I *KNEW* it wouldn't be as fun as the arcade or PC
editions simply because Electronic Arts got their grubby little hands
on it.

By the way, at the same time I saw Block Out!, I also saw Elec-
tronic Arts' (there's that name again! :-) Genesis version of King's
Bounty. This game should probably be avoided at all costs. Although I
myself haven't played it, I do know that it is ANOTHER computer port.
Furthermore, I have a friend who played the IBM-PC version and it was
so stupid, he only played it for about an hour before shelving it. And
this guy is known for playing the most stupid games and saying they're
neat. So when he says this game is stupid, it's got to incredibly bad!
Just to clarify, one of his favorite games for the IBM PC was Sword Of
Aragon. He also liked the UMS (Universal Military Simulator) game and
its sequel, UMS II.

>This should have been a _lot_ more like the arcade version*, which had all of
>these features, plus bonus rounds. To top it off, the block movement works
>differently than the arcade version, which is confusing for players used to
>it. (One can reasonably expect most people who played the game at all before
>to have probably played it on the arcade version, like I did.)

I think they should have adapted the arcade editions also. After
all, that would be the version most people who would buy the game are
familiar with. If you're familiar with the PC editions, more than
likely, you already have the game or have a friend who has the game.
Why spend extra money for something you already have?

>A complete thumbs down for this game.
>
>* Yes, I know the computer versions came first. Given how bad the game is,
>that's not an excuse.

Given that it's a computer port, there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON
why a game should be this bad. I'm just sorry you were cheated by the
people at EA. Hopefully, you'll be able to return the game.... Better
yet, hopefully people will stop buying Electronics Arts' crap until
they actually TRY.

>--
>"Okay Deus Ex Machina Man--let's see your powers save you now!"
>[safe falls on villain]
>"Not bad...."
> -- Phil Foglio's "What's New", Dragon #75 (correction thanks to Pat Berry)
>
>Kenneth Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
> INTERNET: arro...@cs.jhu.edu)

Milton W. Kuo
mil...@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu

Can't touch this...

unread,
Jun 25, 1991, 1:32:16 AM6/25/91
to
What's with all the EA bashing? I, for one, actually like some of the
games they put out. JM Football has got to be the best home football
game ever made, bar none, and I've played most of them starting with
the Atari 2600 version. There might be a few bugs present, but there
is no law which says they must be exploited. A simple gentleman's
agreement before the game not to use the onsides kick trick or
whatever can eliminate the problem. As for the incredibly high
scores, take some time to learn defense. I play Madden often with my
friends and the scores are usually pretty normal since we've taken the
time to figure out how to run a defense. I think it's a great game
and would recommend it to anyone.
I also own King's Bounty and don't find it 'incredibly
stupid'. It's kind of different than any other Genesis game I own and
I find it fun to play.
EA has produced a couple of poor games like Sword of Sodan
(one of the worst games I've played in a while), but there are very
few companies which haven't. Ignore the company entirely and you'll
miss out on some excellant games.

--
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
| Basilisk, who is he? Basilisk, what is he? | Ed Jordan |
| Basilisk,Ba-basilisk, where does he come from?| basi...@cornu.ucsb.edu |
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

Teh Kao Yang

unread,
Jun 25, 1991, 3:18:29 AM6/25/91
to
In article <51...@ut-emx.uucp> mil...@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Milton W. Kuo) writes:
>In article <10...@emanon.cs.jhu.edu> arro...@cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
>
>[some EA bashing stuff deleted]

>
> Another LOSER by Electronics Arts. In their quest for fast bucks,
>they absolutely ignore the consumer......

>
> Given that it's a computer port, there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON
>why a game should be this bad. I'm just sorry you were cheated by the
>people at EA. Hopefully, you'll be able to return the game.... Better
>yet, hopefully people will stop buying Electronics Arts' crap until
>they actually TRY.
>

Well I've been very annoyed by EA lately also. Sure, I've known for the
longest time that it is impossible for an American company to write a
Genesis game that I would like. For some reason it seems that American
programmers just refuse to write shooters or run-n'-jump games. I think
the reason is not that they are striving for originality, but it's just
that they can't do it. They have neither the creativity nor the skill to
write a Mario, a Sonic, a TF3, or even a TMNT. Sure, they write the best
adventure and RPG's, but those games are best played on a PC. They do
not belong on a machine with the graphic capabilities of a Genesis, IMHO.

So what am I getting at?? Well, as you all know, EA is flooding us with
a barrage of computer ports... King's Bounty, Immortal, Sword of Sodan,
Battle Squadron, Might and Magic 2, Blockout, and many more that I am too
disgusted to even list them.... I am not saying that these games are not
fun to play, but picture this, if you will... a kid is the proud owner of
a new Genesis...he bought one after seeing Blazing Lasers on the Turbo,
SMB3 on the NES, and still bought a Genesis after people have told him it
kicks the other machines' butt... he then decides as for his first 3 games
he will buy King's Bounty, Sword of Sodan, and Battle Squadron....soon after
he decides that the people who told him to buy the Genesis are morons.

See, the bulk of Genesis owners, believe it or not, are NOT ABLE to appreciate
games like Star Control, Populous, and other PC ports like most grown-ups can.
If the market gets flooded with more and more games from EA and
other US game companies, it has the potential to hurt the Genesis' future.

Remember, it is not games from U.S. companies that made the NES and the
Genesis successful in the first place. So far in the history of video games
it seems to me that U.S. companies can only put out crappy games,hoping to
make a quick buck,and ruin the future of a game machine. Examples ... the
Atari 2600, the NES(consider these horrible games ... Total Recall, Hudson
Hawk, Wrestlemania).

George McBay

unread,
Jun 25, 1991, 9:36:32 AM6/25/91
to

>So what am I getting at?? Well, as you all know, EA is flooding us with
>a barrage of computer ports... King's Bounty, Immortal, Sword of Sodan,
>Battle Squadron, Might and Magic 2, Blockout, and many more that I am too

^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^


>disgusted to even list them.... I am not saying that these games are not
>fun to play, but picture this, if you will... a kid is the proud owner of
>a new Genesis...he bought one after seeing Blazing Lasers on the Turbo,
>SMB3 on the NES, and still bought a Genesis after people have told him it
>kicks the other machines' butt... he then decides as for his first 3 games
>he will buy King's Bounty, Sword of Sodan, and Battle Squadron....soon after

^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^


>he decides that the people who told him to buy the Genesis are morons.
>
>See, the bulk of Genesis owners, believe it or not, are NOT ABLE to appreciate
>games like Star Control, Populous, and other PC ports like most grown-ups can.
>If the market gets flooded with more and more games from EA and
>other US game companies, it has the potential to hurt the Genesis' future.
>
>Remember, it is not games from U.S. companies that made the NES and the
>Genesis successful in the first place. So far in the history of video games
>it seems to me that U.S. companies can only put out crappy games,hoping to
>make a quick buck,and ruin the future of a game machine. Examples ... the
>Atari 2600, the NES(consider these horrible games ... Total Recall, Hudson

^^^^^^^^^^
>Hawk, Wrestlemania).

First of all, I am an Amiga Owner, And I have Battle Squadron (Don't
be fooled, this ISNT EA's game, they just licenced the Genesis port)
Is it really that bad on Genesis? (Oh, btw, I own a Genesis too)
I have the Amiga Version and Play it ALOT it is one of the best vertical shooters I've seen, either on Amiga or Genesis! I've NEVER seen the Genesis Version
however, so it may have just beeen a really poor port (Anyone else play both
versions? How do you feel about the differences?)

(Flame Mode On)

The Atari 2600 is a crappy console, out to make a quick buck?
Perhaps you do not understand the timeline of Video games, there were
home video games BEFORE the 2600, but, last time I checked, it was the
*First Cartridge Based Console* released years before Ninteno's NES or
way before 16 bit game consoles were thought of...It's graphics WERE much
closer to 'Arcade Quality' at its time of release than the Nintedo's were
at its time of release...Alot of today's gamers might feel that the games
are poor because you just repeat boards over and over again with them getting
harder, and no end, just playing for score...But this is how games were when
the Atari 2600 was released....It is a dinosaur, but it is not fair to
compare it to the likes of the Nintendo or 16bit Consoles

(Flame Mode Off)

(PS I still own and use an Atari 2600! - Mostly for Joust, I find the 2600 games much better than Nintendo 'same old, same old' games (Go around and kill
things and then fight a boss..)

Eric Scott Boltz

unread,
Jun 25, 1991, 11:25:28 AM6/25/91
to
I'd just like to add that I too think that EA has put out some good carts.
Madden football is good and Lakers vs. Celtics is FAR better than Pat
Riley. Granted they've put out some real garbage, but they've got NHL and
a new baseball game coming soon.

I'd also like to see a review of Faery (why'd they spell it that way?) Tale.

Eric

George McBay

unread,
Jun 25, 1991, 1:27:42 PM6/25/91
to
In article <88...@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU> ebo...@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Eric Scott Boltz) writes:
>
>I'd also like to see a review of Faery (why'd they spell it that way?) Tale.
>
Another little nit-pick, they didn't, they are not the people
who developed Faery Tale Adventure, it has been a computer game for about
2 years or more, and wasnt developed by them, most of thier Genesis
ports from computer were not written by them, and alot werent even distrubuted
by them (Example Battle Squadron...However games like Populous (Written
by Bullfrog of England) had US Dist. by Electronic Arts)


>Eric

Milton W. Kuo

unread,
Jun 25, 1991, 2:42:13 PM6/25/91
to
In article <12...@hub.ucsb.edu> basi...@cornu.ucsb.edu writes:
>What's with all the EA bashing? I, for one, actually like some of the
>games they put out. JM Football has got to be the best home football
>game ever made, bar none, and I've played most of them starting with
>the Atari 2600 version. There might be a few bugs present, but there
>is no law which says they must be exploited. A simple gentleman's
>agreement before the game not to use the onsides kick trick or
>whatever can eliminate the problem. As for the incredibly high
>scores, take some time to learn defense. I play Madden often with my
>friends and the scores are usually pretty normal since we've taken the
>time to figure out how to run a defense. I think it's a great game
>and would recommend it to anyone.

I do agree that John Madden Football is the best bar none. How-
ever, I am rather upset at those bugs. As for the high scores, my
friends and I are good at defense. For passing, we use the "pass in-
terference" defense. Personally, I think it's a bug. It's the de-
fense where the pass defender just pushes the receiver away from the
ball. Against anyone else, my friends and I could probably demolish
other players (of course, we would use every trick in the book :-)

As for a gentleman's agreement, we did play one such game. And
the score was even higher than normal since we disallowed some of the
defensive cheats. Anyway, as my friend puts it, "Those aren't bugs!
They're FEATURES meant to be used!" :-)

> I also own King's Bounty and don't find it 'incredibly
>stupid'. It's kind of different than any other Genesis game I own and
>I find it fun to play.
> EA has produced a couple of poor games like Sword of Sodan
>(one of the worst games I've played in a while), but there are very
>few companies which haven't. Ignore the company entirely and you'll
>miss out on some excellant games.

I haven't played the Genesis version of King's Bounty but the PC
version was very stupid, IMHO. Even I felt it was dumber than Sword
Of Aragon -- and I thought SoA was dumb.... But to give Electronic
Arts the benefit of the doubt, I'll assume King's Bounty was made
better for the Genesis. I'll rent it sometime and see....

>--
>=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
>| Basilisk, who is he? Basilisk, what is he? | Ed Jordan |
>| Basilisk,Ba-basilisk, where does he come from?| basi...@cornu.ucsb.edu |
>=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

Milton W. Kuo
mil...@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages