Game Debate #135: Asteroids

[Reed Rothchild | 9,520]

[ZeldaFreak | 3,600]

I mean, it's an absolute classic. This is one of the first arcade games I remember ever playing, right alongside Pac-Man, Donkey Kong & Galaga.

Oh, and Pong. Always forget that's technically an arcade game.

[Sumez | 2,941]

I'd have a lot more fun with it if the throttle and fire buttons were switched around on the cabinet. My mind can deal with the default configuration... 

[PII | 1,884]

I love the versions on N64 and PS1.  They are simultaneous 2-player GOLD.

[JamesRobot | 5,795]

By the book, it's a 6.  I like it and play it on occasion.  But I play Tempest way more often.

[fox | 1,665]

I love some classic coin ops but this one is too herky jerky

[mbd39 | 2,020]

I've never played the original arcade, only the Atari 2600 which I'd give a 5 or 6. It's pretty bland shooter.

 

[RH | 4,903]

I don't really know how to play this one.  I feel like it's a very noteworthy early shooter and from a historical point of view, everyone should play it.  It's really not hard to play a few games because if it's your first play, you'll probably be able to do that in 10 minutes.

However, it's just ok.  It hits all of the core bullet points for simple, but good, gameplay however the nature of this game doesn't gel with me.

I gave it a 6.  For a game I've not invested that much time with, I've had a lot of mixed feelings about it.  I feel like this could be on a top-10 list of most important arcade games.  Maybe not the most fun, but possibly one of the most important to gaming history.

[Link | 2,709]

I like how it captures the technical aspects of piloting a ship. Like the arcade controls of Defender. It's something that doesn't seem to appear in "fun" games now, only more "serious" sim games which are too complicated for me. And I really like the old / early arcade formula exemplified here, classically simple to learn and challenging to master. You can play for a few minutes, but the long game is there for those who want to pursue it. 

[nrslam | 474]

I gave it a 6, since I do play it (2600 version) occasionally.  I did enjoy the arcade version more, and remember being fascinated by the vector graphics. It wasn't first, but I thought it was the first to use them well. The raster versions on home consoles never felt right to me.

The home version is improved significantly, in my opinion, thru use of the Starplex pushbutton controller which replicates the arcade control pretty well. 

Fun trivia question: was the Starplex controller the first 3rd-party controller made for a specific home console game?

 

[Webhead123 | 675]

Classic game and the clever physics of moving your ship make it unique and challenging for its time. Still, it's never quite been a list-topper for me and I won't end up playing it for more than a few minutes at a time. Like James, if I wanna play this style of game, Tempest is where my heart is.

6/10

Edited January 6, 2023 by Webhead123

[Reed Rothchild | 9,520]

I'd be fine never playing it again.

[wongojack | 214]

It's a 9 for me.  The basics of the game are challenging enough to keep someone entertained forever.  Like any single-screen game, there is no real progress, so you have to challenge yourself with high score which is fine with me when I'm in the mood.  There were many thrusty-type games at the time, so I think that what made this one different is that breaking down the rocks until there are none left satisfies those OCD tendencies that many puzzle games rely on, and the vector graphics look really cool.  It probably suffers a bit from the fact that the "thrusty" ship movement isn't very influential anymore, and I would tend to rank Asteroids Deluxe (I have a cocktail machine in my house) higher because of the fact that they eliminated satellite farming as a way to play the game forever, but the basic Asteroids gameplay is something that I will find fun until the day I'm dead.

 

Commenting on other comments

• If you've only played the 2600 version then be sure to try the difficulty options.  Increasing speed and lowering the frequency of extra lives adds enjoyment for me.  I also prefer to play with shields like Asteroids Deluxe, but ymmv
• I see almost no comparisons between Asteroids and Tempest except you shoot things.  They come from almost totally different development paths.

[G-type | 2,480]

Shooting big things that break into small things while having to use physics based thrust and turning is elegantly simple and a perfect Arcade concept. I don't love using just buttons for controls, and I suck at it, so that docks it a couple points. From a pure enjoyment standpoint, I prefer Asteroids Deluxe. 

[Webhead123 | 675]

I actually have a poster of an alternate version of the Atari box art for Asteroids above my computer, alongside Yars' Revenge and Tempest. They're beautiful pieces, as much of the great Atari cover art was.

 

Edited January 6, 2023 by Webhead123

[TDIRunner | 2,731]

Honestly, I was never that crazy about the game.  I'm just not a huge fan of the control setup.  It's not terrible, but it's the type of game I play until I die and then I'm done with it.  I have little desire to ever try again.  

[the_wizard_666 | 1,325]

Meh, not for me.

[JeremiahJT | 75]

10 out of 10. I have spent many hours on this one. Mostly through emulation either on Atari compilation discs or Xbox 360 Game Room. It is actually quite amazing I am as bad as I am at this game considering the sheer amount of games I have played.

I have also spent tons of time on the 2600, 8-bit computer, 7800, and Lynx ports. The two player cooperative and competitive variations on the 7800 are excellent.

Edited January 7, 2023 by JeremiahJT

[DefaultGen | 5,401]

5/10. I played the 2600 version a lot as a kid. Can’t really complain too much about it because of the era but like a dozen more interesting multidirectional shooters came out just a couple years later. 

[JeremiahJT | 75]

On 1/6/2023 at 11:11 AM, wongojack said:

It's a 9 for me.  The basics of the game are challenging enough to keep someone entertained forever.  Like any single-screen game, there is no real progress, so you have to challenge yourself with high score which is fine with me when I'm in the mood.  There were many thrusty-type games at the time, so I think that what made this one different is that breaking down the rocks until there are none left satisfies those OCD tendencies that many puzzle games rely on, and the vector graphics look really cool.  It probably suffers a bit from the fact that the "thrusty" ship movement isn't very influential anymore, and I would tend to rank Asteroids Deluxe (I have a cocktail machine in my house) higher because of the fact that they eliminated satellite farming as a way to play the game forever, but the basic Asteroids gameplay is something that I will find fun until the day I'm dead.

 

Commenting on other comments

• If you've only played the 2600 version then be sure to try the difficulty options.  Increasing speed and lowering the frequency of extra lives adds enjoyment for me.  I also prefer to play with shields like Asteroids Deluxe, but ymmv
• I see almost no comparisons between Asteroids and Tempest except you shoot things.  They come from almost totally different development paths.

Just to reiterate that the first game on 2600 Asteroids is ridiculously easy.  Doubly so if you have the difficulty switch in the B position. Try moving the difficulty switch to the A position and try games 6 and 8 (or 14 and 16, 22 and 24, and 30 and 32).

[JeremiahJT | 75]

On 1/6/2023 at 9:49 PM, JeremiahJT said:

10 out of 10. I have spent many hours on this one. Mostly through emulation either on Atari compilation discs or Xbox 360 Game Room. It is actually quite amazing I am as bad as I am at this game considering the sheer amount of games I have played.

I have also spent tons of time on the 2600, 8-bit computer, 7800, and Lynx ports. The two player cooperative and competitive variations on the 7800 are excellent.

I recently picked up an Atari VCS which comes with Antstream Arcade preloaded.  The arcade version of Cadash is the first thing I sunk my teeth into, but after that, I played a bunch of arcade Asteroids.  Anstream Arcade has challenges for some games, of which Asteroids is one. I had a lot fun trying to get a gold medal on the first few challenges.  I have not gold medaled all of the challenges, but I will give it my best.  I guess arcade Asteroids will always be a go to for me anytime I can find it.

One of the challenges is how many times you can hyperspace without dying, the record for that one is in the 40s I think.  I do not know how that is even possible.

[DoctorEncore | 3,691]

I find games like this impossible to rate. Along with something like Pong, it's incredibly iconic and influential, but I have no desire to play it. 10 for historic relevance, 3 for actual gameplay.

[cartman | 195]

These days i don't even remember all the versions i've played anymore or if/how they differed. Used to have it on my Sony Ericsson phone that had a round button so you could rotate the ship that way and remember having a blast.

It's in the dynamic between dodging the big rocks while compartmentalizing others into smaller pieces - altough not too many simultaneously. Preferrably eliminating just one at a time if possible.

[Bearcat-Doug | 5,104]

Double post.

Edited February 25, 2023 by Bearcat-Doug

[Bearcat-Doug | 5,104]

I forgot what I gave it, but it's one of the few classic arcade games that I never really got into. It wasn't bad, but I preferred to play Pac-Man, Galaga, etc.