/vr/ - Retro Games

>>4634327
Genesis just like every multiplat.

>>4634327
A 7/10 vs a 6/10 game, never understood the controversy. Genesis is the 7 btw

>>4634474
>Genesis is the 7 btw
Which one is the 6?

They are both extremely mediocre. Genesis only wins out because of how nice it looks.

The actual best Aladdin game is the Game Gear one.

>>4634327
Aladdin has been done to death. Pic related is a better debate :^)

Virgin Aladdin doesn't even look that good, the sprite animations are nice, but the spritework itself is very plain, the Capcom game's sprites have a lot more detail, even if they have less animation frames. Backgrounds are also a lot more lively and detailed on the Capcom game.
And of course, the most important thing, the Capcom game has polished controls and focused level design, as you'd expect from early 90s Capcom. It's no masterpiece but it's a pretty well done little platformer.
Virgin's game on the other hand has bad collision detection, and the level design often has maze-like parts instead of being focused on the platforming.
I know I'm being harsh on the Virgin game, but I actually don't hate it, it's a good effort from Dave Perry. But when it comes to game design, he can't beat 90s Capcom.

Not the shit one.

>>4634327
Genesis. Gameplay was faster and more exciting, the graphics were better, and you got to use a sword which gave the game a lot more appeal to me. Really, if you are a kid, as soon as you see that one game has you throwing apples at enemies while the other gives you a sword, there's no contest.

The Capcom game isn't bad but it's kind of a shame that it had to be overshadowed by the Genesis one. If it wasn't an Aladdin game and didn't bring about such unflattering comparisons with the Genesis Aladdin game it probably would have had more of a following.

>>4634332
friendly reminder

>>4634526
The PC version looks better.

>>4636696
The one with horrendous MIDI sounds and lower vertical resolution because it was coded too shittily to maintain a decent performance otherwise?

Also, to the other namefag, the SNES version was a multiplatform too. And with the exception of the Amiga/DOS version (that at least looks like the original somewhat), the Genesis one ports were either shitty (NES, beat by a bootleg of the SNES version in quality control), or completely different (Master System version).
The hell are you talking about?

>>4636731
The wider amount of colors make up for it though. Were you really expecting music up to par with the film for any port?

>>4634327

>>4636737
>Were you really expecting music up to par with the film for any port?

He said the PC version had horrendous midi sounds, meanwhile the SNES version has excellent music. I'm pretty sure it never crossed his mind to think any of them would have CD-quality audio. However the SNES version is "on par" with the film as in it has good sound and the essence of the music if that's what you mean.

>>4636783
I'm just talking about PC and Genesis.

>>4636754
kek

>>4635615
>Really, if you are a kid, as soon as you see that one game has you throwing apples at enemies while the other gives you a sword, there's no contest.
The ironic thing about this is that, while you can stunt enemies with apples on the SNES game, there's not really a lot of occassions you'll use them. On the other hand, you'll have to rely on apple-throwing a lot on the virgin game, since they actually kill enemies, not just stunt them. I think some bosses can only be killed with apples.

>>4634327
usually I prefer the snes games, because of better audio and graphics like superprobotector aka contra. But this game is the exception. The MegaDrive version has much more action and fantastic animations and details.

>>4636754
Meanwhile as autists wage flame wars about which version is best, both Mikami and Dave Perry are admitting each their version sucks and the other version plays better.

Genesis version was held back by poor planning and the cancellation of a lot of transition levels and enemies originally held back for a Sega CD version that never came, and one of the levels left was so poorly tested it allows the player to skip it after three times.

Capcom version was held back by cartridge limitations because they were cheap, hardware with limited VRAM because Nintendo was cheap, and that would not accomodate better animation frames (not that Disney was supporting them like they did with the other version, aside from telling them how many ways to defeat enemies are not kosher), and had a pyramid level that made no sense.

Capcom Aladdin is a better game, Virgin Aladdin has better animation. Neither is amazing, but both are worth playing.

>>4634327
stop doing this

Genesis Aladdin is infinitely better. SNES Aladdin is rather forgettable. It does have a much better final boss though

>>4638921
Only good thing about Virgin aladdin is the sprite animation. Controls and level design is mediocre to bad.

Mega Drive Aladdin was definitely better
Only contrarian Capcomshills and Nintendrones think otherwise

>>4638937
Both are okay games, but as already stated countless times, the Capcom game has more polished game design and tighter controls.
Virgin Aladdin has good sprite animations, but worse graphics (backgrounds, sprite detail), janky hitboxes and collision detection, and aimless level design.
Not everything is a console war, anon.

SNES Aladdin was definitely better
Only contrarian Virginshills and Segautists think otherwise

>>4638938
>worse graphics
I love this meme
SNES version makes me puke also what the fuck is this shit?

>>4638945
Yes, worse graphics.

>>4638945
That's the genie level. Level 4, I think.
Pretty fun level with lots of platforming/acrobatic action. Virgin game wishes its genie level was that fun.

I owned both growing up, so I don't even know why this debate even started, but I'll put it simply:

There's a reason Virgin isn't making games anymore.

>>4638953
I also owned both growing up, to me the Capcom was was always undoubtely the better game.
I think people who shit on the Capcom game and claim the Virgin game is some sort of essential Genesis title are just kids who only owned a Genesis growing up.
The sprite animations are cool but that's all that game has going for it. I'd rather play Cool Spot than Aladdin, if I had to pick a Perry game.

>>4638951
>>4638952
Cool bait dudes

I also owned both growing up, to me the Virgin was always undoubtely the better game.
I think people who shit on the Virgin game and claim the Capcom game is some sort of essential SNES title are just kids who only owned a SNES growing up.
The sprite animations are bad but that's all that game has going for it. I'd rather play Aladdin than Bubsy, if I had to pick a game.

>>4638967
Is that screenshot supposed to probe anything?
Look at that monochrome background, unacceptable.
I like the detail of the Mega Drive there, though.

>>4638973
Hah, good attempt, but why Bubsy?

>>4638974
The fact that an older console with less colors is able to make a game more colorful and faithful to the source material than the SNES says a LOT about the Capcom team who worked on that licenced turd.

>>4638974
>>4638982

>>4638973
Nobody really claims Aladdin is an essential SNES title, but you see Virgin Aladdin on many "top genesis titles" list, and it's just because of the sprite animation, and because the game had a massive marketing campaign when it came out, the actual game is OK at best.
The Capcom game is also just OK, but has objectively better controls and level design (and better graphic detail, at that).

>>4638982
>more colorful
You know this isn't true, right?
>licensed turd
Now, now, anon. I know we might be tourching a sensible subject here, Virgin Aladdin maybe was an important part of your childhood or something, but let's be honest, both Aladdin games, Virgin and Capcom, are nice games. I don't hate the Virgin game, I appreciate the animations, it looks really smooth. I'm just aware of the issues it has with its controls, but that's not something exclusive to Aladdin, all Dave Perry games (and many other western platformers) suffer from the same issue.

>>4638982
>faithful to the source material
Well... I wouldn't be so sure about that.
I don't remember Al going around using a scimtari, making guards poof into dust in thin air. I remember Al doing acrobatics to fight the guards, and that's what he does on the Capcom game.

>>4638986
>objectively
using this word doesn't make your subjective opinion anymore viable.

>>4638986
Or maybe, you know, the game was actually good and you are just a bitter contrarian because you either grew up playing the inferior version or because you started emulating 2 weeks ago and pretend to know everything about retro game history.

>>4638992
>You know this isn't true, right?
It is true, are you also blind?

>I'm just aware of the issues it has with its controls
What issue? Have you never played Earthworm Jim or something? It takes 2 minutes to adjust and you'd need to be retarded to find them too hard to play.

>>4638994
The Mega Drive game is very faithful to the source material. They even hired the same Disney animators to make the sprites and some of the level art. Sorry but you are just baiting or being completely delusional.

>>4638998
Do you know what subjective and objective means?
Capcom Aladdin has more polished controls, the collision detection works better. On the Virgin game it doesn't work as good. You will go through platforms a lot as seen here: >>4634526
There's objective proof anon.
It's okay if you prefer the Virgin game because of the sword, or the animations, that's alright. But you can't say that the Virgin game has objectively better controls than the Capcom game. It's just not true.
If you want to defend your favorite game, accept its flaws first, and focus on the good aspects (animation, music)

>>4639005
There's literally nothing wrong with the controls
Git gud

>>4639003
>the inferior version
They are different games altogether, anon. They aren't "versions".
The inferior version of Virgin's game is the PC version which is missing a level, or the PAL NES port which is absolutely atrocious.
>are you also blind?
Look at this an tell me the right one is more colorful: >>4638951
>Have you never played Earthworm Jim or something?
Yes, and EWJ has the same collision and hitbox issues.
>It takes 2 minutes to adjust
I know, I've beaten these games a lot of times. I actually love EWJ 1 and 2. But I still acknowledge they have control issues.
>They even hired the same Disney animators to make the sprites and some of the level art.
Yes, and they did a good job at the animation aspect. However, they forgot to tell Perry that Aladdin only ever used a sword at the very end, and barely. Most of the movie Al uses acrobatics to fight his enemies.

You seem angry anon, tone down the ad-hominem, this is just a friendly discussion about games.

>>4639013
I have no problems beating the game, I did when I was a kid. But the collision issues are still there. If you want to keep denying it, then you're just a fanboy I guess.
Again, focus on the good things the game has, and accept the flaws it has.

>>4639018
>Look at this an tell me the right one is more colorful

>Using a pixellated emu pic taken with incorrect aspect ratio

I'm sure you know better, but all you do is keep making these weak baits.

>ad-hominem
Literally where? Do you even know what that word means? Because it sure doesn't look like you do my new friend

>>4639020
What "collision" issue?
Be more specific, last time I checked things collide like they should.

>>4639023
>Using a pixellated emu pic taken with incorrect aspect ratio
Colors are still the same, pixelated or not.
Come on anon, I give the Virgin game the pro of having the better animation, even if I prefer the Capcom game. Why can't you accept that the Capcom game had better coloring?
>Literally where?
You told me I'm some kid emulating, or that I'm blind, or that I'm baiting. I'm just having a vidya discussion anon, no need to get angry about this.
Ultimately, I think both games are decent. I just give the nod to the Capcom game because of the reasons I already explained.

>>4639032
>Colors are still the same, pixelated or not.
So you have never played on a CRT then
You see, Mega Drive games use a technique called color dithering that takes advantage of video signals of that era to simulate more colors than the console allowed.
But you still insist that a pixellated mess is what the game was supposed to look like which is a lie and even one of the devs mentions it in a video interview where they are playing on an LCD TV.

>Why can't you accept that the Capcom game had better coloring?
Because it's simply not true. It also had a terrible art direction and washed out colors even compared to the emulated Virgin game.

>>4639028
Here: >>4634526
it's not a game-breaking thing, I still could beat the game as a kid, but it's still there.

>>4639037
Yes, I know about dithering, and I played the game on a CRT when I was a kid. For a MD game, it has good colors, but come on, the SNES game has more colors overall. It's no secret that the SNES could pull off at least twice the colors the MD can, even with dithering into account.
>Because it's simply not true. It also had a terrible art direction and washed out colors even compared to the emulated Virgin game.
You seem to have a hard on against the Capcom game, anon. I don't know what to tell you. Let's agree to disagree?

>>4638994
Aladdin on Genesis appeals to the Chad Warden types

>I WANT TO SWORD SOME NIGGAS
>SLASH, SLASH SLASH

>>4639038
He clearly stops pressing the left button on the last second and the sprite was clearly not close enough to the floor to consider it a successful jump.
Are you used to more lenient nintendo ledges where you can stand on them if your character has 1 pixel touching it?

Me as a kid:
>OOOH THE GRAFICKS AND SWAWD!
Me as I got older:
>I never gave the SNES game a second glance due to the less appealing sprites, but this is clearly the more well made game.
Me now:
>Both are meh, Capcom game is less meh but Virgin game still has better sprites and more nostalgia tied to it for me, so the Virgin game gets taken out more.

>>4639041
>nintendo ledges
Huh? we're talking Capcom and Virgin here, why mention Nintendo?
>He clearly stops pressing the left button on the last second and the sprite was clearly not close enough to the floor to consider it a successful jump.
Seems close enough to me.
Anyway, anon, I know this game was special to your childhood and you hate seeing criticism for it, but I'm not actually completely shitting on it. I'm saying it has good sprite animation, it has good music, and honestly, though the controls aren't the best, they work. It's playable. I'm just pointing out some issues the controls have, they could have been better.
I don't get why you must have this mentality of "SEGA GAME GOOD, NINTENDO GAME BAD", both games are OK, witht heir strenghts and flaws.

Me as a kid:
>BING BING WAHOO!
Me as I got older:
>I never gave the Genesis Aladdin game a second glance due to the less appealing mature content, but this is clearly the more well made game.
Me now:
>Capcom game is the second coming of Christ and has better controls and better colors and music and netplay and Nintendium
BING BING WAHOO!

>>4639041
>are you used to more lenient nintendo ledges where you can stand on them if your character is standing on them?
Fucking kek, Virgin defenders are always worth a chuckle.

>>4639048
I never had a problem with ledges, nor did people back in the 90s with this or EWJ.
You are literally the only person complaining about them and cherrypicking everything.

>>4639049
>using a /v/ meme
>using a /v/ meme that thinks gameplay noises are bad
You have to go back.

>>4639052
Not more than Nintedrones who shill shit tier version of licenced games because they only had Mario shit on their systems.

>>4639054
Who are you quoting?

>>4634327
this one is better and you know it

>>4639062
>Better graphics, animation, music and controls than SNES or Genesis
Fucking THIS
Nostalgia fags BTFO by the objectively superior version

>>4639053
>You are literally the only person complaining about them and cherrypicking everything.
Literally? Are you sure?
As I said, both games are OK. It's not worth getting angry over something like this, anon.
Perry games always had control issues, EWJ games aren't famous for their tight controls, but their graphics and humor.
You just come off as a fanboy who feels threatened by common criticism, a criticism that isn't even that heavy, I'm not calling Perry's games shit, I liked them. They just don't excel on game design, and are more focused on visuals. I don't know where am I cherrypicking, since I'm talking about very general things present throughout all of his games.