Bad ports

[Anonymous No.3542365]

Post the worst ports of classic games you know of.

Here's two examples
Ghosts n Goblins on NES
https://youtu.be/5ZgqugtReso
And
Castlevania on Amiga
https://youtu.be/utFlAX9RJQM

[Anonymous No.3542372]

>Ghosts n Goblins on NES
explain yourself

[Anonymous No.3542373]

Anything on Amiga or ZX, take your pick of whatever faggy Euro shit computer you like.

[Anonymous No.3542374]

>>3542372
What do you mean?

[Anonymous No.3542380]

>>3542374
how is it bad? it's a bit shabby, but no content is missing, something like Final Fight on SNES is far worse, since it has less enemies on screen, cuts out co-op, removes Guy and an entire level,

[Anonymous No.3542407]

>>3542380
There are lots of issues with it. It is much slower, it is poorly coded, the enemy attack patterns are all wrong, and for some reason certain bosses are now immune to weapons. It just sucks.
Do you want me to tell you why Castlevania on Amiga is bad.

[Anonymous No.3542410]

>>3542407
>It is much slower
what the fuck did you expected from the nes.
>it is poorly coded
a bit shabby like i said, but nothing serious
>the enemy attack patterns are all wrong
they are simplified yes, but overall aren't that much different from the arcade
>and for some reason certain bosses are now immune to weapons
yeah that sucks, but they aren't immune to all weapons, only certain weapons, and they drop you a weapon that works before/during the boss fight to make up for that.
you can see the list of differences here
http://insertcoyne.com/ghostsngoblins/versions.html
it's more than you mentioned, but the author thinks it's a pretty good port overall and i agree. it's funny that people think consoles got "worst ports" while the true horror was always on home computers.

[Anonymous No.3542425]

>>3542410
It looks like shit to me. Jerky scrolling, jerky animation, that annoying music. Wouldn't play touch the damn game

[Anonymous No.3542426]

>>3542410
>what the fuck did you expected from the nes.
Just because the system was poor doesn't mean the game was good. In fact, it is the opposite.
>a bit shabby like i said, but nothing serious
It's awful. If you've played the arcade version for a long time and know the game, you'll see just how different the NES port is, and not for the better.
>they are simplified yes, but overall aren't that much different from the arcade
But they're wrong. Pretty much all of them are wrong.
>and they drop you a weapon that works before/during the boss fight to make up for that.
Which makes you wonder why they made them immune in the first place.
>but the author thinks it's a pretty good port overall and i agree
Maybe good compared to the rest of the NES arcade ports, but that's not a hot field. I don't know why you're defending this port, to be honest. In this day and age you can play the arcade original and not worry about garbage like this port.

[Anonymous No.3542437]

>>3542425
I find the graphics and music to be charming, haven't played it back then so no bias. Maybe you did and it traumatised you.
>>3542426
>Just because the system was poor doesn't mean the game was good. In fact, it is the opposite.
In fact it was a fantastic game for 1985, only SMB could compete.
>I don't know why you're defending this port
becouse OP thinks it's "the wors port" while it's clearly not. I never said it can compete with the arcade.

[Anonymous No.3542439]

>>3542425
I find the graphics and music to be charming, haven't played it back then so no bias.
>>3542426
>Just because the system was poor doesn't mean the game was good. In fact, it is the opposite.
In fact it was a fantastic platformer for 1985, only SMB could compete.
>I don't know why you're defending this port
becouse OP thinks it's "the worst port" while it's clearly not. I never said it's as good as the arcade, but it certainly not the worst port of this game and not a bad port overall.

[Anonymous No.3542447]

>>3542439
>In fact it was a fantastic platformer for 1985
On the NES, I guess.
>becouse OP thinks it's "the worst port" while it's clearly not
It IS a bad port and this thread is for bad ports, not worst ports.
>not a bad port overall.
It is definitely a bad port. An average port is just the game running more or less the same on downgraded hardware. A bad port, like GnG on NES, actively makes the game worse.

[Anonymous No.3542450]

>>3542447
>this thread is for bad ports, not worst ports.
OP does say worst ports

Now check this out, NES graphics but at the right framerate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WC809188Pss

>>3542380
>something like Final Fight on SNES is far worse
It's an ok game if you don't compare it to the arcade version.

[Anonymous No.3542459]

>>3542450
>Now check this out, NES graphics but at the right framerate:
The framerate is only one of the many flaws of GnG on NES.
>It's an ok game if you don't compare it to the arcade version.
It's a port of an arcade game. The point is that you're able to play the game you played at the arcade at home. When you take out something as basic as multiplayer you're making it a bad port.

[Anonymous No.3542470]

>>3542459
>The framerate is only one of the many flaws of GnG on NES.
Not sure how many of those got fixed in the GBC version

>The point is that you're able to play the game you played at the arcade at home
Plenty of ports differ from the arcade version and hold up just fine, although FF SNES is not the best example of that

[Anonymous No.3542479]

>>3542470
>Plenty of ports differ from the arcade version and hold up just fine, although FF SNES is not the best example of that
Here's how I rank ports.

Good: Is an arcade perfect/near arcade perfect port (Sega Ages on the Saturn, for example) or changes itself to suit its system (Rygar on NES).

Average: Is a port that retains the original form of the arcade game but is downgraded due to hardware (New Zealand Story on Master System).

Bad: Removes features, does not replicate the arcade gameplay properly when trying to do so (Final Fight on Amiga, Final Fight on SNES, Ghosts N Goblins on NES).

[Anonymous No.3542505]

>>3542479
>Bad: Removes features, does not replicate the arcade gameplay properly when trying to do so (Final Fight on Amiga, Final Fight on SNES, Ghosts N Goblins on NES).
Kinda agreed on FF(but only becouse it was handled by Capcom themselves), but if GnG port is bad, most ports are bad then, which makes this thread pointless, since what you consider to be good or even average port is a rarity.

[Anonymous No.3542509]

>>3542365
Lunar Eternal Blue Complete

I wish I was joking even a little.

Lunar Legend GBA is even worse though.

[Anonymous No.3542512]

>>3542505
There are lots of bad ports, but not that many. There are lots of good ports on the Master System, PC Engine, Mega Drive, Saturn, Playstation, and Dreamcast. Other systems just weren't suited to those games. GnG is bad because it fails to replicate the arcade game in terms of control, AI, and other factors of gameplay.

[Anonymous No.3542515]

But Ghosts n Goblins on NES is good.

[Anonymous No.3542516]

>>3542512
>GnG is bad because it fails to replicate the arcade game in terms of control, AI, and other factors of gameplay.
I just played the arcade version in MAME and the differences are not as big as you make them out to be, the nes version is still fun as it's own game, which is the most important thing. AFAIK all other ports of this game were utter dogshit(for various reasons, C64 had a lot of content removed, GBC was too zoomed-in etc.), so why shit on the NES version?

[Anonymous No.3542517]

>>3542515
No it isn't and I've already said why. It's a bad port.

[Anonymous No.3542521]

>>3542516
When did I say those were good? Though, the C64 version plays a bit better than the NES version.

[Anonymous No.3542525]

>>3542521
You didn't, but demanding a 1985 port to the NES handled by some 3rd party to be very accurate to be considered average(by you) is silly, it's perfectly playable and has all content intact, it was great at a time, still holds up today (if you are capable of cutting a 1985 NES game some slack) and that's what's important.

[Anonymous No.3542530]

>>3542525
>demanding a 1985 port to the NES handled by some 3rd party to be very accurate to be considered average(by you) is silly
It's called having standards. If I payed full price for that in 1985 I'd be disappointed. It's not so bad on a home computer because the software was so much cheaper.
I won't cut the game slack. It is bad, so I'll call it bad.

[Anonymous No.3542531]

>>3542515

I agree. It's only bad if you compare it to arcade version, could have been done much better. Either way, there are much worse GnG ports than the NES version

[Anonymous No.3542537]

>>3542531
Maybe only the GB port is worse

[Anonymous No.3542546]

>>3542537

the GB port, the Amstrad CPC port, the PC 88 port, the ZX Spectrum port, the Commodore 64 port, the Amiga port, the DOS port..... all worse than the NES port.

[Anonymous No.3542570]

>>3542530
>It's called having standards. If I payed full price for that in 1985 I'd be disappointed

Were you even born when this game was released?

Not the guy you are arguing with but I did play it in it's prime regularly in both the arcade and on my NES. This was early NES and we were simply thrilled to be able to play aracde games at home once again (we had gone a few years without this).

Up to this point in gaming history virtually all home versions were at best a close approximation to the arcade. This was true for atari. This was true for my coleco, and it was true for the NES. We were grateful just to have the game.

This is one of the first "modern" arcade hits to land on the NES.

[Anonymous No.3542582]

GnG on NES may be shitty, but Amigavania is an abomination, especially because they had no excuse to make it that bad given the Amiga's capabilities.
GnG being a downgraded port is understandable, the Famicom isn't as powerful as a 1985 arcade PCB, but the Amiga sure was more powerful than the Famicom which is a console from 1983.

[Anonymous No.3542583]

>>3542570
He's almost certainly not and just talking out of his ass. No one expected home games to look exactly like the arcade.

[Anonymous No.3542631]

>>3542583

People also forget that early NES did not really have arcade ports on it. They were rare as fuck in the first year aside from nintendo's own arcade hits (kung fu and SMB) or re-released of old colecovision titles from the previous gen.

By the end of 1986 GnG remained one of the only arcade titles on the system.

Even in 1987 there were maybe only a dozen arcade titles in total to chose from.

[Anonymous No.3542653]

Really surprised no one has mentioned Final Fantasy 1 NES. That port is god awful. Broken spells, weird damage algorithms, and even more... I mean look at the list of things broken in this game:

Critical Hit bug
Equipment bugs
Intelligence bug
Invisible woman of Cornelia
Magic bugs
Peninsula of Power
Running glitch

[Anonymous No.3542656]

>>3542653

The original Famicom version is better then?

[Anonymous No.3542661]

Really disgusting port of the way superior Mega Drive version.

[Anonymous No.3542662]

>>3542656
Not actually sure about that. Everything I've read always says they're in the NES version, but didn't really specify if they meant the famicom as well or not.

[Anonymous No.3542663]

>>3542661
It's not even a port. It's literally a different game. This post is cancer, get out.

[Anonymous No.3542665]

>>3542661

>superior
>Virgin game
>wonky hitboxes and bad unfocused level design

>better than a Capcom game by Shinji Mikami

You must work on your bait a little bit harder.

[Anonymous No.3542678]

>>3542631
>SMB
>arcade hits
>and other bullshit
hope it's a bait.
famicom had a shitload of arcade ports, ESPECIALLY in it's early years.
it was designed to run nintendo's arcade games. in it's first year there were only 3 non-arcade games if we don't count educational software based on arcade games.

[Anonymous No.3542680]

>>3542653
>Really surprised no one has mentioned Final Fantasy 1 NES. That port is god awful

FF1 on NES is not a port though, It is the original.

Everything else is a port or a remake that happened to fix some bugs.

[Anonymous No.3542693]

>>3542372
Made by Micronics.

[Anonymous No.3542695]

Maui Mallard on Game Boy:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=seakHHG-qyI

[Anonymous No.3542706]

>>3542680
>>3542656
>>3542653
To be fair, it is a god awful port of Dungeons and Dragons.

[Anonymous No.3542710]

>>3542678

Not in the west.

In 1986 the only arcade games of note released on the NES were Gradius and GnG.

The famicom did not exist in gamer culture at the time. The first we heard it even existed and that it was different from our Nintendo was in a 1989 video game magazine article. You cannot bring up it's games when you are talking about 80's gamer culture.

[Anonymous No.3542712]

>>3542706
>>3542661
>>3542653
Oh boy, here we go again..

[Anonymous No.3542714]

>>3542678
>>SMB
>>arcade hits

SMB was a huge arcade hit. Most gamers of the era saw it in arcades before they managed to get a NES of their own.

[Anonymous No.3542723]

>>3542710
>In 1986 the only arcade games of note released on the NES were Gradius and GnG.
>implying nobody cared about Donkey Kong, Popeye, Mario Bros. Galaga, Pac-man(!)
NES had most of famicom's games in released in first few years, a lot of those to stay in japan were NOT arcade ports(Gomoku Narabe Renju, Mahjong, Nuts & Milk, Devil World etc.)
Will you stop pulling thing out of your ass?

[Anonymous No.3542739]

Mortal Kombat on Gameboy is incredibly awful.

KoF '95 is somehow great though.

[Anonymous No.3542745]

>>3542723
>>implying nobody cared about Donkey Kong, Popeye, Mario Bros. Galaga, Pac-man(!)

In 1986 they didn't give a fuck about those titles. It was already mentioned those were released on previous gen consoles. In the context of the thread we were talking about NES gaming at the time of GNG release, and it's library of then-current arcade titles.

>>3542723
>Gomoku Narabe Renju, Mahjong, Nuts & Milk, Devil World etc

"Oh those old gamers were so stupid. Why did they play inferior NES shit when they could have just played superior Famicom products folded 1000 times from glorious Nippon"

You are a fucking entitled millennial who has no clue of what gaming was actually like from the era you claim to worship.

[Anonymous No.3542763]

>>3542745
>In 1986 they didn't give a fuck about those titles.
That doesn't make your statement about NES not having arcade titles any less ridicilous.
>"Oh those old gamers were so stupid. Why did they play inferior NES shit when they could have just played superior Famicom products folded 1000 times from glorious Nippon"
Who are you quoting, I never even implied that those games were good.
>You are a fucking entitled millennial who has no clue of what gaming was actually like from the era you claim to worship.
What's with the name calling, out of arguments?
You are a someone who was a wee lad back then and remembers only greatest hits, like everything else didn't fucking exist.
And not saying that GnG port is bad, I'm not faggot OP.

[Anonymous No.3542765]

>>3542745
>In the context of the thread we were talking about NES gaming at the time of GNG release,

Not him, but where was this decided upon? There were probably a bunch of kids who got an NES as their first console so they wouldn't care they'd been on earlier systems.

[Anonymous No.3542775]

>>3542763
>That doesn't make your statement about NES not having arcade titles any less ridicilous.

Except pac man wasn't released until 1987 on NES, and Galaga in 1988.

It looks like you are pulling up famicom release dates and getting confused. There was no market for these in the west and they came out a few years later as low cost retro games.

Donkey kong was re-released in 1986 though, I'll give you that one.

>You are a someone who was a wee lad back then and remembers only greatest hits, like everything else didn't fucking exist.

I played every commercially released NES (not famicom) title from 1986 though 1988 as they came out. I rented 2-3 games a week and played the good and the bad.

1989 onward the market became too flooded and I couldn't keep up. There was more bad than good but I still tried to keep up with the month by month new releases.

[Anonymous No.3542776]

Strider and Bionic Commando for the NES were the worst ports. Not even remotely like the arcade game. /s

[Anonymous No.3542781]

>>3542765

This tangent was started by the guy who said he would have been pissed if he got the NES version of GnG back in the day.

>>3542530

He accused us of not having any standards, as if there were any other options available.

That is when it was pointed out that GnG was one of the first and only modern arcade game available on the NES at the time (excluding previous gen re-releases).

That is what lead to this thread derail.

[Anonymous No.3542809]

>>3542775
Well, my bad, I indeed confused the japanese and western markets which were really different.
>>3542781
Agreed, OP and whoever else thinks that being able to play massive, groundbreaking games like GnG at your home(especially with all the content intact) was not a godsend is an idiot.

[Anonymous No.3542894]

>>3542665
>>better than a Capcom game by Shinji Mikami
Because Mikami is incapable of making shitty games, right?

Quit being a developer fanboy.

[Anonymous No.3542906]

>>3542894

Is that game considered bad?

Anyway you'd kind of be giving weaaboos the right hand, because TEW was developed with mostly western devs, although Mikami was directing. I thought it was a good game, just not a masterpiece like RE4.

[Anonymous No.3542915]

>>3542372
>>3542380
>>3542410
>>3542439
>>3542450
>>3542470
>>3542505
>>3542516
>>3542525
>>3542570
>>3542781
>Thread derail
To the contrary, I also only came into this thread to shit all over OP and the fucking endless parroting that "NES GnG is bad" when in fact it was among my favorite launch titles. If we can actually get that shit tightened up this will have been a much better thread than some kusoge hurr durr thread it was conceived as. Keep up the good work!

[Anonymous No.3542945]

>>3542906
>being this much of a west-hating race traitor

Explains why you prefer Capcom Aladdin then.

[Anonymous No.3542952]

>>3542945
Most of western console games were shit, the only company that was making non-shitty games was called Rare, a spot-on name! And even some of their games were shit.

[Anonymous No.3542958]

>>3542945

>projecting this much

I was just telling you weebs could use that argument against you, I actually liked The Evil Within.

[Anonymous No.3542961]

>>3542945

>bases his taste in games according to race

Explains why you fellate Virgin Aladdin then.

[Anonymous No.3543181]

>>3542546
The C64 and Amiga versions are better than the NES version. The Spectrum and CPC version are the same. I haven't played the others.

[Anonymous No.3543194]

>>3542961
>>bases his taste in games according to race
Except I'm not the one sucking off any developer. See: >>3542665

Cool projection though, weebcuck.

Also, Virgin Aladdin has much better gameplay, less boring levels, an OST that is based more off the movie's fantastic score, and amazing animations and aesthetics.

[Anonymous No.3543204]

>>3542693
I don't know anon, this port seems pretty feasible considering the year

The problem with Micronics however is that they never improved. The same quirks in this version of GnG for example stuck around all the way to games they supposedly made for the NES in 93. Pretty laughable but hey, gotta make that money

[Anonymous No.3543205]

>>3543194

He didn't imply that Shinji Mikami was better because he was japanese, though.

>Virgin Aladdin has much better gameplay, less boring levels

Not at all.

>an OST that is based more off the movie's fantastic score, and amazing animations and aesthetics.

All of this I'll be inclined to agree although the graphics and music on the Capcom game are also pretty nice. The only edge Virgin's game has over the Capcom game is the animation of the characters.

[Anonymous No.3543210]

IMO GnG isn't a horrible port but it's harder than it should be for being too choppy, I really prefer the smoothness of the GBC version even though it's zoomed. Now the MS-DOS can be considered the worst port, shit is awful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c88AoHIAa0

[Anonymous No.3543238]

>>3543205
>He didn't imply that Shinji Mikami was better because he was japanese, though.
What other reason would he have? Mikami was an amateur at the time. His argument was basically "It's made by this Japanese guy, so it's better".

>Not at all.
Swordplay is actually fun compared to Aladdin's hopping and bopping. Levels contain more secrets and collectibles than Capcom's game, making them more enjoyable to explore. The levels in CapAl are just too linear and easy.

[Anonymous No.3543249]

>>3543238
>Mikami was an amateur at the time.

He was an apprentice from Tokuro Fujiwara, so I wouldn't say he was amateur. Also, it was a Capcom game, they didn't hire amateurs.

>Swordplay is actually fun

It's really not and most of the times you will be just throwing apples anyway.

>hopping and bopping

Yeah, fuck jumping on a platformer, right?

>Levels contain more secrets and collectibles

What collectibles? extra lives? The levels were not fun to explore and had a lot of dead ends. A platformer is better with linear level design. Aladdin isn't a Metroidvania.

Sorry Anon, I'll give you Virgin's game has great animations, and overall it's not a bad game at all, but no, Capcom's game just has better controls and level design.

[Anonymous No.3543265]

>>3543249
>so I wouldn't say he was amateur
Aladdin was his first platforming game.

>most of the times you will be just throwing apples anyway.
Sure, if you wanted to cheese most of the enemies in the game like a scrub.

>Yeah, fuck jumping on a platformer, right?
You missed my point. Virgin's Aladdin simply has more variety and style.

>What collectibles? extra lives?
Er, no. Abu tokens, genie tokens, scarabs, wishes... lots of stuff to find.

>A platformer is better with linear level design.
Poor generalisation, anon.

>Capcom's game just has better controls and level design.
Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree then.

[Anonymous No.3543275]

>>3543265

>Virgin's Aladdin simply has more variety and style.

How? All you can do on Virgin's Aladdin is jump, use the sword and throw apples.
On Capcom's game you can jump, throw apples (that don't even kill enemies, just stunt them), bounce on them, grab from ledges, grab and swing from all kind of different objects making levels more interactive, and glide.
Mechanically, Capcom's game is a lot more complex in both physics and controls.

Also, what do you mean with "style"?

I guess we can agree to disagree if you really prefer the kind of level design Virgin's game has over the Capcom one, but I will continue to defend the Capcom game's controls over the Virgin game.

[Anonymous No.3543282]

>>3542509
Not really a port; it is a remake. Unless you mean that the Playstation version is technically a Saturn port? In which case, it just has a bit worse music due to being on a different chip.

Agree that it is inferior though.

[Anonymous No.3543330]

>>3543181
>Amiga versions are better than the NES version

>no music
>broken hit detection

>better than NES

"no"


>The Spectrum and CPC version are the same

thats not even remotely true on any level

[Anonymous No.3543374]

>>3542365
Developers will burn in hell for what they did to Castlevania. Bugs all over the game, shitty graphics and the music being off... What is it like to release an unfinished game?

[Anonymous No.3543407]

>>3542365
>that Dracula fight
What the FUCK

[Anonymous No.3543431]

>>3542695
Why even port it to the GB? The idea alone goes completely against the strong points of the game.

[Anonymous No.3543451]

>>3543265
>Virgin's Aladdin simply has more variety and style.

If by variety you mean going left and right on a redundant scenery collecting pointless shit, then I understand your hype for Virgin's Aladdin. That game has absolutely no substance.

[Anonymous No.3543483]

>>3543451
>That game has absolutely no substance.
More thought was put into it than Capcom's levels which are nothing special, just compare the genie stages or the lava stages, the Virgin game is more creative with the former and more of an adrenaline rush in the latter. Not to mention Capcom Aladdin mostly has flat, uninspired stages and a few dull pointless autoscrollers. Oh, and the boss fights are better in the Virgin game as well.

[Anonymous No.3543502]

>>3543483

All wrong except for the auto-scrollers, I'll give you that, but it's only like 1 level I think. And the bonus level if you want to count that.
Other than that you're wrong on all aspects.

>Oh, and the boss fights are better in the Virgin game as well.

It had more boss fights, but they're nothing special.
Final boss on Virgin's game was a joke.

[Anonymous No.3543964]

Ghosts 'n Goblins ports from best to worst.

Amiga
C64
Atari ST
Amstrad CPC
ZX Spectrum
NES
GBC
DOS

[Anonymous No.3543975]

Ghosts 'n Goblins ports from best to worst. The arcade original is the best.

Amiga
C64
Atari ST
Amstrad CPC
ZX Spectrum
NES
GBC
DOS

[Anonymous No.3544189]

>>3543374
>What is it like to release an unfinished game?
probably heartbreaking. nobody sets out to make a shit game but it happens sometimes.

[Anonymous No.3544246]

megaman for dos

[Anonymous No.3544264]

>>3544246
not a port a completely original game but still shit nonetheless

[Anonymous No.3544385]

>>3542374
It's fucking terrible. It's the second worst port of the game, beaten only by the Gameboy port which is hilariously based just the NES port but cropped.
>>3542525
You my friend are fucking delusional.
>>3542546
Both commodore ports are far superior to the NES.
>>3542915
>it was among my favorite launch titles
That right there is the only reason you idiots like it. Coz you played it when you were 9 and it blew your little minds.

[Anonymous No.3544393]

>>3543330
Amiga port of GnG is much better you delusional faggot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jz2UOI1kGhY

[Anonymous No.3544397]

>>3543330
>>3542546
>>3543330
Amiga port of GnG is much better you delusional faggot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqcA3vxUl3o

[Anonymous No.3544412]

>>3542365
Megaman Dos

[Anonymous No.3544483]

Welcome to hell
https://youtu.be/zfGw12XCTnM
https://youtu.be/3g8-BDeR8is

[Anonymous No.3544552]

Anything ported to the Speccy, teletext colours at 2fps

[Anonymous No.3544575]

>>3544397

graphically? yes
in every other way? no

[Anonymous No.3544609]

>>3543204
>The same quirks in this version of GnG for example stuck around all the way to games they supposedly made for the NES in 93

if you want more than 20 fps you're just being greedy

[Anonymous No.3544746]

>>3543431
>Why even port it to the GB?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQI___0B00M

[Anonymous No.3544752]

>>3544397
Amiga fucking blows and you know it.

The best example is comparing castlevania on amiga to castlevania on x68000

[Anonymous No.3544826]

>>3543210
I like how the demon in the intro just takes the girl away and zoops away in a split second.

[Anonymous No.3544837]

>>3544246
These character potraits remind me so much of the kids drawings from the Nintendo Power Robot Master contest...

[Anonymous No.3545397]

>>3544385
>It's the second worst port of the game, beaten only by the Gameboy port

[Anonymous No.3545486]

>>3545397
Are you implying that the Spectrum port is bad?

[Anonymous No.3545645]

>>3545486
Are you inferring that I give a fuck about your ignorant opinions, Australia-kun?

[Anonymous No.3545672]

>>3542365
>Ghosts n Goblins on NES

This is fun though.

[Anonymous No.3545764]

>>3545645
The Spectrum port is far, far better than the NES port.

[Anonymous No.3545765]

>>3545672
No it isn't. Play the original and you'll see how bad the NES port is. Play any of the good ports and you'll see how bad the NES port is.

[Anonymous No.3545847]

>>3542517
But the original game is a shitty quarter muncher anyway

[Anonymous No.3545853]

>>3542661

Two completely different games, both are good with very different focuses and design philosophy.

Instead of being angry shitters can't we just be happy we got two good games and talk about them based on their merits?

[Anonymous No.3545854]

>>3542706
Well to be fair, thats just a god awful port of Lord of the Rings

[Anonymous No.3545858]

There's no such thing as bad ports, just bad games.

[Anonymous No.3545860]

>>3542945
I like both Aladdins, but western platformers in the 80's and 90s
were generally pretty poor

[Anonymous No.3545876]

>>3545764
This is the kind of thought that reminds me of being deep in a fit of nausea with the flu. Time slows down and you lie there in agony until your mind focuses on some absurd repetitive detail or thought pattern to try to prolong the time until you need to crawl back to the toilet.

Once i had the opening of the Four Seasons "Oh what a Night" stuck in my head for hours, just me sweating in bed while Franki Valli sings about the December of '63 over and over in my head.

This reminds me of that kind of thought pattern. this idea that NES GnG has to be bad, to the point that even cartoonishly bad ports can't rip you away from your neurosis.

Feel better soon OP

[Anonymous No.3545893]

>>3545847
Quarter of what?
>>3545876
If you seriously think the N'E'S port is better than the Spectrum port, then I doubt you've played both.

[Anonymous No.3545916]

>>3545893
The Spectrum game has bad graphics, almost no sound, missing enemies, weird simple patterns for the enemies that are there, missing items, and is only three stages long.

How do they even compare?

[Anonymous No.3545917]

>>3545916

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWwZLsMd9TY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKxKZKIvD84
Heres a full run of the Spectrum port, and a full run of the nes port. Check it out for yourself

[Anonymous No.3545918]

>>3545893
I fucking hate you so much Australia-kun

[Anonymous No.3545929]

>>3545916
How are the graphics bad? Relative to the hardware they're much better than the NES port.

[Anonymous No.3545934]

>>3545929
They are pretty decent for a speccy game, I just meant that relative to the arcade game, since people in the thread have been nitpicky with the NES graphics

[Anonymous No.3545982]

>>3545934
As I said here
>>3542479
An average port is just a downgraded version of the game to suit the system it is running on. While GnG on NES is poor looking compared to its contemporaries on the system, GnG on the Spectrum looks good for the Spectrum, but has obvious downgrades necessary for it to run on that machine.

[Anonymous No.3546023]

>>3544752
yeah Amiga fucking blows
however GnG is a good exception and shits on the NES version, don't be a retarded fanboy

[Anonymous No.3546025]

>>3544575
In every way it's better, except the music which is shit on both versions. The frame rate and AI on the NES ports are totally fucked up, the Amiga port is a lot better

[Anonymous No.3546152]

I figure up was used to jump since the vast majority of Amiga games used only one fire button, and that was used to attack. How do you use items in the game such as the axe or dagger?

[Anonymous No.3546156]

>>3542653
How can the original be a port?
There was no other version before this you points might be valid but it's in no way a port in any definition.

[Anonymous No.3546243]

>>3542365
>castlevania amiga
holy fuck that music
What the fuck are those Dan Halen monsters at the beginning?

[Anonymous No.3546248]

Best ghouls and ghosts port is the wonderswan version.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpn2rAwnhFM

[Anonymous No.3546249]

Best ghouls and ghosts port is the wonderswan version.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQvnCu9Sk40

[Anonymous No.3548169]

>>3545765
>Play the original and you'll see how bad the NES port is
I did, and NES is fine, it certainly has a ton of character, perhaps even more character than arcade.
inb4: muh tastes > ur tastes

[Anonymous No.3548208]

[Anonymous No.3548225]

>>3548208
Super Malware Bros.

[NESfag No.3548227]

The platform is part of the problem as much as the game itself though.

[Anonymous No.3548248]

>>3542661

[Anonymous No.3548254]

>>3542906
Yeah, it's just a generic third-person shooter with a grotesque skin and some puzzles.

The Saw videogame was better in the puzzle aspect (though not by much, 5/10 at best)

[Anonymous No.3548265]

>>3548169
>character
What do you mean?

[Anonymous No.3548283]

>>3548265
SOUL

[Anonymous No.3548335]

>>3543238
>Swordplay is actually fun compared to Aladdin's hopping and bopping.
Not with Virgin's depthless shit implementation of it, no. Prince of Persia had great swordplay. In Aladdin, you just mash the attack button until the enemy for some reason explodes.

[Anonymous No.3548374]

>>3548225
I don't think I ever got past the second level, what with the keyboard control. The game had no front end either.

[Anonymous No.3548742]

>>3546249
where have I seen these spikes before?

[Anonymous No.3549212]

>>3548283
Translation: I played it as a kid, therefore it is good

[Anonymous No.3549259]

>>3542776
I wouldn't call either a port. Very much separate games.

[Anonymous No.3549297]

>>3545853
>Instead of being angry shitters can't we just be happy

But I thought the whole concept of this board was to bash each other's favorite games until everyone loses interest in retro gaming...

[Anonymous No.3549362]

>>3549212
never played it as a kid

[Anonymous No.3549470]

>>3548208
What is the name of this clone? When I took some computer class back in the late 90s, a guy would pull this out during breaks. I was so amazed you could play Mario on computers at all, and got him to copy it onto a floppy so I could check it out on my IBM back home.

[Anonymous No.3549536]

>>3546249
that's not a port and it's not good

[Anonymous No.3549548]

>>3549470
Mario & Luigi.

[Anonymous No.3549584]

To whatever console ... SNES, 3do, Saturn.

Duke3d for playstation, Hexen for any console.

SF2 World Warrior, TMNT1 and Paperboy to DOS.

Megarace to Sega CD.

Battletoads in battlemaniacs to Master System.

Double Dragon 1 or 2 to whatever.

>>3544246
#3 was worse, but they weren't even ports.

[Anonymous No.3549615]

>>3549584
> Double Dragon 1 or 2 to whatever.
bitch i'll cut you

[Anonymous No.3549625]

>>3548208
This was a fascinating thing! even tough it was just a tech demo and the physics were poopie.

[Anonymous No.3549690]

>>3549615
Genesis, master system, DOS...

The NES and PCE versions weren't ports.

[Anonymous No.3549725]

>>3549548
Thank you! Time to get the kusoge nostalgia pumping over here!