I'm sure I read an interview with the game's creator David Crane where he admitted he had "bolted" sections of another game he was working on into Ghostbusters because he only had six weeks to complete.
Yes, he was working on a driving game, Activision acquired the license for Ghostbusters and David used that driving game as the foundation.
not sure to be honest, the way the levels will play would require a change in the equipment available
although don't see any reason why not
my idea pretty much plays the same way, city map, driving, ghost catching level , battle Stay Puff then end sequence
Oh, I was just being a little facetious there.
There's certainly scope to improve on Ghostbusters by livening up the individual sections without making wholesale changes to the game design.
For the driving there needs to be a bit more to do that just vacuum up the occasional ghost that you run across. And ghost catching could do with being a little less random; just waiting around until it wanders into a position where you can catch it doesn't really strike me as riveting gameplay.
It's a yes from me. I haven't played it for a long time but I did enjoy it. I even bought the Master System version. Only looked at that once and thought it looked worse than the speccy one!
It's got one of the few codes I remember aswell. Smith Peter 10242021 for loads of cash.
Oh, no. Every time you turn up something monumental and terrible happens.
I don’t think I have the stomach for it.
--Raziel (Legend of Kain: Soul Reaver 2)
I enjoyed it as a kid, although I don't really know why because let's face it there isn't actually much to it. Don't know why so many praise the c64 version either, because it doesn't actually play any better either and even the music is pretty sub-par by the machine's standard. That said I'm not sure there is a much better way of conveying the movie in game form.
The Xbox 360/Playstation game was about the only good version of a Ghostbusters game, even if it was essentially a sequel rather than a game of the movie.
At least you only need to do the fork lift bit once per game, and the same goes for the ending. They'd both get as tedious as the driving if you had to do them a lot.
Capturing the ghosts...seems to be mostly luck, I only get one about 20% of the time (without bait).
I just played it again myself, and had a near 100% record with capturing ghosts. That's all by being patient and waiting for exactly the right moment to fire the trap though. The beams are frequently of no use whatsoever in guiding the ghost towards the trap; it's really just a reaction test.
How would you improve the driving section? Maybe if it was a bit like spy hunter...
Yep. Go down the Spy Hunter route with a smaller car, more varied obstacles, an incentive to get there a bit faster, and a bit more skill required to vacuum the ghosts.
I suspect that the car is the size it is because David Crane wanted to show off how big a sprite he could get on the C64 by multiplexing rather than because the gameplay demands it.
I didn't really like this game originally because of the dodgy presentation which looked dated at the time. For some reason, though, it's a game I come back to under emulation. It might be because it is so easy, like Bruce Lee but without the playability. It does seem to have an odd charm.
If you place your trap and men correctly you can use the stream to guide the ghost into the trap 99 percent of the time. Occasionally the ghost will flicker which allows it to pass through the stream and escape but at least you get to hear the garbled speech sample as the little guy gets slimed.
No, I never liked it. It was clearly designed for another machine with no real care applied to the Spectrum version, apart from perhaps the logo sprite. The graphics in the trapping game are particularly atrocious, and there's a massive bug in that there's nothing to say which character should go where. If you get them wrong, they fire their beams off-screen instead of into the centre and you can only move them further apart.
It was a nice idea, to add the management aspect and link a series of mini-games, but let down as the mini-games themselves were such utter rubbish.
there's a massive bug in that there's nothing to say which character should go where. If you get them wrong, they fire their beams off-screen instead of into the centre and you can only move them further apart.
I don't think that is a bug, pretty sure all the versions do that?
I have to say I found the game dull and repetitive. I only played it to the end sequence once just to see it and any other time I picked it up, I'd had enough after a capture or two. The bank idea was a good one but I couldn't be bothered to work on that.
For 1984 especially, it's not a terrible game but it's really not a very engaging game either.
No, I never liked it. It was clearly designed for another machine with no real care applied to the Spectrum version, apart from perhaps the logo sprite. The graphics in the trapping game are particularly atrocious, and there's a massive bug in that there's nothing to say which character should go where. If you get them wrong, they fire their beams off-screen instead of into the centre and you can only move them further apart.
It was a nice idea, to add the management aspect and link a series of mini-games, but let down as the mini-games themselves were such utter rubbish.
Agree with this. Terrible graphics, little playability, lazy, lazy port.
The bog standard font and the terrible out of tune intro music were unforgivable - and that's before you even play the game.
Perhaps someone should start a "suggestions for a new version of Ghostbusters" thread and then the forum members could make suggestions on to how make a better game than the original.
Then - if good sensible ideas emerge - someone might chose to take on the project?
I suspect that the car is the size it is because David Crane wanted to show off how big a sprite he could get on the C64 by multiplexing rather than because the gameplay demands it.
The car itself is a character-based software sprite, using the horizontal fine scroll to move it smoothly; my money would be on the size being a design choice rather than "macho programming".
Perhaps someone should start a "suggestions for a new version of Ghostbusters" thread and then the forum members could make suggestions on to how make a better game than the original.
Then - if good sensible ideas emerge - someone might chose to take on the project?
already started designing one, following the same format but doing each part slightly differently
just whether we can be arsed to actually commit to code
I like the cross between arcade and business management - i have no problem with the graphics , even though they are flickery , i still play it once in a while ! (lots of negative comments , but its winning the poll !)
The car itself is a character-based software sprite, using the horizontal fine scroll to move it smoothly; my money would be on the size being a design choice rather than "macho programming".
If it's a design choice, the design must have been to have very little else on the screen at the same time. If you want to make an interesting driving game, I'd think that you generally want to have a little more reaction time to see if there's anything on the road ahead of you. Still, so long as you're just sucking up ghosts and only have to intercept them by the time they get to the middle of the car, it's not a problem.
If it's a design choice, the design must have been to have very little else on the screen at the same time. If you want to make an interesting driving game, I'd think that you generally want to have a little more reaction time to see if there's anything on the road ahead of you. Still, so long as you're just sucking up ghosts and only have to intercept them by the time they get to the middle of the car, it's not a problem.
Which is what the driving section is pretty much about, time management; you have to spend the time driving to each job and can choose to either go directly or drive around the houses to hoover up the ghosts heading to Zuul which also saves time indirectly since that delays the inevitable. That fits in with the resource management in the rest of Ghostbusters more than a more action-oriented driving game would.
Which is what the driving section is pretty much about, time management; you have to spend the time driving to each job and can choose to either go directly or drive around the houses to hoover up the ghosts heading to Zuul which also saves time indirectly since that delays the inevitable. That fits in with the resource management in the rest of Ghostbusters more than a more action-oriented driving game would.
I wouldn't dispute that. It's just very dull.
I suppose it beat Desert Bus to the punch by a few years though.
i'd disagree because i've always felt it adds to the overall tension of the game; is there enough game time (or indeed time to reach the destination) left to risk a longer run or should it be done quickly? That said, i've only really played the Spectrum version once (which is why i haven't added my vote to the poll) so my observations are based on the C64 and i still play that version occasionally.
i'd disagree because i've always felt it adds to the overall tension of the game; is there enough game time (or indeed time to reach the destination) left to risk a longer run or should it be done quickly? That said, i've only really played the Spectrum version once (which is why i haven't added my vote to the poll) so my observations are based on the C64 and i still play that version occasionally.
Bit harsh that, there are at least the ghosts to worry about rather than just keeping the vehicle in a straight line.
I always thought that driving along, on an almost never ending road that went in a straight line, broke any ideas of realism. We were supposed to be driving though New York - it could have been the M6 at 4:00am.
I never really noticed it making any real difference to the overall game, but I must be wrong in that respect.
Comments
Yes, he was working on a driving game, Activision acquired the license for Ghostbusters and David used that driving game as the foundation.
not sure to be honest, the way the levels will play would require a change in the equipment available
although don't see any reason why not
my idea pretty much plays the same way, city map, driving, ghost catching level , battle Stay Puff then end sequence
Oh, I was just being a little facetious there.
There's certainly scope to improve on Ghostbusters by livening up the individual sections without making wholesale changes to the game design.
For the driving there needs to be a bit more to do that just vacuum up the occasional ghost that you run across. And ghost catching could do with being a little less random; just waiting around until it wanders into a position where you can catch it doesn't really strike me as riveting gameplay.
It's got one of the few codes I remember aswell. Smith Peter 10242021 for loads of cash.
I don’t think I have the stomach for it.
--Raziel (Legend of Kain: Soul Reaver 2)
https://www.youtube.com/user/VincentTSFP
you say facetious, I thought it was quite a valid point ;)
The Xbox 360/Playstation game was about the only good version of a Ghostbusters game, even if it was essentially a sequel rather than a game of the movie.
Very good! :lol:
The driving section...ARGH! boring.
but was enjoyable when I was a kid(???)
Same goes for using the forklift.
Capturing the ghosts...seems to be mostly luck, I only get one about 20% of the time (without bait).
How would you improve the driving section? Maybe if it was a bit like spy hunter...
At least you only need to do the fork lift bit once per game, and the same goes for the ending. They'd both get as tedious as the driving if you had to do them a lot.
I just played it again myself, and had a near 100% record with capturing ghosts. That's all by being patient and waiting for exactly the right moment to fire the trap though. The beams are frequently of no use whatsoever in guiding the ghost towards the trap; it's really just a reaction test.
Yep. Go down the Spy Hunter route with a smaller car, more varied obstacles, an incentive to get there a bit faster, and a bit more skill required to vacuum the ghosts.
I suspect that the car is the size it is because David Crane wanted to show off how big a sprite he could get on the C64 by multiplexing rather than because the gameplay demands it.
If you place your trap and men correctly you can use the stream to guide the ghost into the trap 99 percent of the time. Occasionally the ghost will flicker which allows it to pass through the stream and escape but at least you get to hear the garbled speech sample as the little guy gets slimed.
I like it. It's quaint.
It was a nice idea, to add the management aspect and link a series of mini-games, but let down as the mini-games themselves were such utter rubbish.
- IONIAN-GAMES.com -
I don't think that is a bug, pretty sure all the versions do that?
- IONIAN-GAMES.com -
It's not if that's how the game was designed to play.
For 1984 especially, it's not a terrible game but it's really not a very engaging game either.
Write games in C using Z88DK and SP1
It's just designed very badly. You have to figure it out by trial and error after getting slimed a few times.
Agree with this. Terrible graphics, little playability, lazy, lazy port.
The bog standard font and the terrible out of tune intro music were unforgivable - and that's before you even play the game.
I grew up on the C64 which is better, but I still found the spectrum 128k version fun to play right through to completion.
Then - if good sensible ideas emerge - someone might chose to take on the project?
My games for the Spectrum: Dingo, The Speccies, The Speccies 2, Vallation, SQIJ.
Twitter: Sokurah
The car itself is a character-based software sprite, using the horizontal fine scroll to move it smoothly; my money would be on the size being a design choice rather than "macho programming".
already started designing one, following the same format but doing each part slightly differently
just whether we can be arsed to actually commit to code
If it's a design choice, the design must have been to have very little else on the screen at the same time. If you want to make an interesting driving game, I'd think that you generally want to have a little more reaction time to see if there's anything on the road ahead of you. Still, so long as you're just sucking up ghosts and only have to intercept them by the time they get to the middle of the car, it's not a problem.
- IONIAN-GAMES.com -
Which is what the driving section is pretty much about, time management; you have to spend the time driving to each job and can choose to either go directly or drive around the houses to hoover up the ghosts heading to Zuul which also saves time indirectly since that delays the inevitable. That fits in with the resource management in the rest of Ghostbusters more than a more action-oriented driving game would.
I wouldn't dispute that. It's just very dull.
I suppose it beat Desert Bus to the punch by a few years though.
i'd disagree because i've always felt it adds to the overall tension of the game; is there enough game time (or indeed time to reach the destination) left to risk a longer run or should it be done quickly? That said, i've only really played the Spectrum version once (which is why i haven't added my vote to the poll) so my observations are based on the C64 and i still play that version occasionally.
Bit harsh that, there are at least the ghosts to worry about rather than just keeping the vehicle in a straight line.
I always thought that driving along, on an almost never ending road that went in a straight line, broke any ideas of realism. We were supposed to be driving though New York - it could have been the M6 at 4:00am.
I never really noticed it making any real difference to the overall game, but I must be wrong in that respect.