Wasn't it cool when games had a ton of ports/variations?

[BoneSnapDeez]

Is it just me, or does anyone else miss this era of gaming? When browsing Hardcore Gaming 101 I'm reminded that:

Alien Syndrome was arcade game that was then ported to Sega Master System, NES, Game Gear, MSX, PC DOS, Amiga, Atari ST, and Commodore 64.

Ikari Warriors was also an arcade game, and then had MSX, NES, Apple II, DOS, Atari ST, Atari 2600, Atari 7800, Amiga, Commodore 64, Amstrad CPC, and ZX Spectrum ports.

Ultima: Exodus had releases on Apple II, Atari 8-Bit, Commodore 64, PC, Amiga, Atari ST, Macintosh, and a bunch of Japanese computers.

I always found it fun to compare all the different variations of the same game, find the differences between computer and console versions, contrast console vs. handheld, etc. Such a thing doesn't exist today. Excluding exclusive titles, we now have Xbox 360, PS3, and PC versions that all play about the same with some minor differences in control and graphical presentations. It's clear why this is happening: fewer consoles are on the market, computers generally all use the same operating system, arcades are a dying breed, etc. But I miss the variety, and multiple-porting still could be done today, at least to a lesser extent.

Wouldn't it be great if the next great SNK fighter had releases on PS3, Xbox 360, PC, Wii, Vita, and 3DS? Or if Square Enix did the same with an RPG? I don't think we'll ever see such a thing ever again, and that makes me pretty sad.

[dsheinem]

big games like COD and Madden regularly get multiple ports...as did SF4.

[Flake]

I liked it because the hardware often dictated the final form of the software. Sometimes you ended up with completely different games. For example: Moonwalker was a crazy Genesis game but it was an absolutely bat-shit insane arcade game.

Nowadays, especially with the PS3 and 360, it seems like there isn't any practical difference between multi-platform games.

[MrPopo]

Nowadays, especially with the PS3 and 360, it seems like there isn't any practical difference between multi-platform games.

Precisely. Right now there are basically three platforms: PC, 360/PS3, and Wii. And the difference between the PC and 360/PS3 isn't very pronounced. In the past you had several flavors of computer plus multiple very different consoles.

[Opa Opa]

I can make a quick comparison of games from "way-back-when".

Night Stalker (Intv) Vs. Dark Cavern (2600)

Night Stalker and Dark Cavern are both made by Mattel; and it's the exact same game- just different platforms.

Dark Cavern:


Night Stalker:


I've played both and I'd have to say the Intv version is better overall.

[noiseredux]

that's why GB, GBC, and GBA were so awesome. They often got ports of console games, but were totally different games actually. Instead you got a re-imagining of what a PS1 or PS2 game would look like if it had been released on NES or SNES.

[ExedExes]

Everyone who is reading this thread should check out and subscribe to YouTube user GamingHistorySource

http://www.youtube.com/user/GamingHistorySource

He runs a series of videos called "Let's Compare", where he goes through old games (mainly arcade ports) and runs through all the ports he can get his hands on. I'd suggest any videos, but I like his comparison video on Commando -- never knew the C64 could "chiptune" as well as that port did.

Also, remember when Mattel made games for Coleco and Atari, Atari for Coleco and Mattel, and Coleco for Mattel and Atari?

[GameMasterGuy]

that's why GB, GBC, and GBA were so awesome. They often got ports of console games, but were totally different games actually. Instead you got a re-imagining of what a PS1 or PS2 game would look like if it had been released on NES or SNES.

Ah, but there was also the inferior ports. Look at the GBC version of Donkey Kong Country (no, not DKL, DKC; it existed, I kid you not) and the four SMA games. All of them are a waste of time cramming something beyond the system into a downgraded port instead of an entirely new game that works *with* the system.

[noiseredux]

Ah, but there was also the inferior ports. Look at the GBC version of Donkey Kong Country (no, not DKL, DKC; it existed, I kid you not) and the four SMA games. All of them are a waste of time cramming something beyond the system into a downgraded port instead of an entirely new game that works *with* the system.

yeah I played it. I didn't think it was awful. Inferior? Sure. Compared to SNES. But good considering the hardware... I liked it enough. But agreed -- DKLand was just fucking badass.

[GameMasterGuy]

Ah, but there was also the inferior ports. Look at the GBC version of Donkey Kong Country (no, not DKL, DKC; it existed, I kid you not) and the four SMA games. All of them are a waste of time cramming something beyond the system into a downgraded port instead of an entirely new game that works *with* the system.

yeah I played it. I didn't think it was awful. Inferior? Sure. Compared to SNES. But good considering the hardware... I liked it enough. But agreed -- DKLand was just fucking badass.

And it was exactly what was right for the console, making a game *for* it, instead of porting a game and adding nothing of real value to it. Why not just play the original DKC?