The Making of Ghostbusters on the Commodore 64 89
Next Generation recently began running content from the respected British gaming magazine Edge, and today they're sharing The Making of Ghostbusters. The article is a look back to a barely-remembered but (for the time) forward thinking movie tie-in for the Commodore 64. Instead of a lame 'action' title following the movie's plot line, the game was set in the world of the Ghostbusters, and allowed players to build a financial empire through ghostbusting. "Crucially, for a game with so many parts - driving, simple resource management, shooting and trapping ghosts - the pieces snapped together well, and the money-making, business-upgrading elements gave the game a lasting replayability. Activision's Ghostbusters is polished, intelligently-paced, and suggests a measured and meticulous development approach: something which wasn't the case at all. 'A typical C64 game took nine months from start to finish,' laughs David Crane, the game's designer. 'Ghostbusters took six weeks!' Crane is one of the most prolific developers of the early videogame era. Creating titles such as Little Computer People and Pitfall made him Activision's star programmer."
This game fell into the (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Seeing that it only took 6 weeks to make, I now realize why it was so patterened.....they must have made a mint with it, though. With a dev cycle that short, and "free" marketing just by the name.....at least it was slightly better than most movie tie-ins.
Luckily, I was
Re: (Score:1)
The way it handled your account was pretty neat, though - you'd get a code that you'd punch in next time you played (on any copy of the game). But as you said the difficulty didn't really increase so after two or three cycles it didn't matter.
Re: (Score:2)
There were quite a few options you could get, but bait was basically required. If you didn't have bait and the marshmallow alert went off staypuft would trash a building and you would get charged
Re: (Score:2)
+1 FTW!
Re: (Score:2)
Empire building... classic meme. (Score:3, Insightful)
I remember this game. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It was an awesome game, but very challenging. I remember finally getting the hang of it after a few weeks. You really had to think fast to decide where to drive to next, around the city.
I remember the marshmallow man would show up, too... What did you have to do with him again? I think you had to place a bait somewhere so he didn't smash a building.
I also remember listening to the intro sequence for 30 mins straight, watching that bouncing ball. That was some fantastic C64 music!
Youtube video (Score:5, Informative)
Here's a Youtube video [youtube.com] for anyone who wants to relive old memories. :-)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.gamebase64.com/game.php?id=3133&d=18&h
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
After that it just became a little boring. I got to $128,000 and stopped playing but up until that point it was awesome.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
6 weeks?! (Score:5, Interesting)
And that was one of my favorites back on the C64. It was very addictive. This really shows it's the overall creativity and playability that matters most in a game, not necessarily the complexity or graphics.
Interesting coincidence that it's posted on the same day as someone from Microsoft belittling the Wii for its lesser graphics and simplicity. Doesn't make it less fun!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Funny, though, that this game is the one that finally made me jealous (game-wise) of my friends with C64s... and it was because it had great gameplay AND good graphics. Until then, I was quite happy with the PET2001, since there plenty of text and ASCII games that kept me content (never mind writing my own games in BASIC, which was perhaps
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
Listening to the Spectrum version made me realise how lucky I was to be a Commodore owner.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:6 weeks?! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.mobygames.com/game/et-phone-home [mobygames.com]
I hear it's alright.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"Ghostbusters! Ahahahahaha!!!" (Score:3, Interesting)
The game gets a bad rep nowadays, usually because of the botched NES port made by a team of crack-smoking monkeys, but the original will always be one of my all-time favorite computer games.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.firebox.com/index.html?dir=firebox&act
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C64_Direct-to-TV [wikipedia.org]
Layne
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Time (Score:5, Insightful)
All the work done in code patterns and abstractions seem to have distanced developers from the metal. It's a necessary evil in some aspects (since the actual C64 hardware was always exactly the same so some safety stuff could be glossed over), but I've always wondered how some of the greats (like Crane) would have fared had they grown up 20 years after they did.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think they'd have an easier time of it now in some respects. As many computer nerd points as it may earn you to be able to code in assembly, it's a lot easier to write software when you have access to things like arrays and for/next loops instead of building them yourself out of e.g. register checks and jump commands.
Re: (Score:2)
Six weeks of development is a pretty short time... especially if you're going to DEBUG assembly. Perhaps if YOU were informed enough about the realities of development in any kind of assembly you'd know that. There takes a level of skill to make it work that's more than just nerd points.
Oh, but wait, this particular game was produced for a variety of platforms. It wasn'
But (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Your "enthusiasm" regarding 3/4G languages tells me that you missed the entire point of programming a device like the C64.
Don't waste cycles!
Let me repeat that:
Don't waste cycles!
While you might have profiled (and eventually optimized) an inner loop, I really doubt that your code was anything near the optimum.
Nowadays I work in Java, C# and Python but I still miss the old days when you could write diretly ti the registers and hook up your functions to an interrupt vector. And I still
Re:Time (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course, we can still have hard real-time systems, we just have to put the hard stuff in hardware. That's a reasonable solution, but it's narrowed the scope of problems that software can solve.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You make it sound like Crane and all his peers are retired or dead, but we're not.
As a former Atari 2600 programmer (although unfamous and less accomplished than Crane), I can tell you that today's challenges are just different from the ones we faced back then.
For the 2600 we had to have very precise timing (sometimes to an accuracy of 1 CPU cyle) in our display routines, but we never had to
First game I used a cheat code on (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Good times...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Thus, there's a lot of things you could type to get a lot of money; again IIRC, it doesn't take more than four or five playthroughs to be able to afford everything you want at the starting screen, and any money after that is just bragging rights.
Re: (Score:1)
Why do I know this?!? (OFF TOPIC) (Score:2)
And yet truly random bits of information get etched into permanent memory with no regard to their utility. This is a perfect example. In the 23 years since I saw Ghostbusters in the thea
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Game Remake (Score:2, Interesting)
Was pretty amazed to discover that someone made a remake of the game for Windows.
http://files.filefront.com/Ghostbusters/;6357091;/ fileinfo.html [filefront.com]
I didn't enjoy it quite as much but that's because somethings seem different than what I remember of the game play. Anyone else try this remake? Would love to get opinions on this.
a lesson for today (Score:5, Interesting)
if only others thought this way...
Anyone else read this as... (Score:2)
Anyone else read this as...
"We sold this game at full price to marks who bought on brand name only and then laughed all the way to the bank. Thanks - suckas!"
(Long story short, I think the "license the movie tie-in and then release the cheapest game you possibly can" mentality is still out there and has never gone away.)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
SMS Port (Score:1)
I think it's high time for the next-gen systems to come out with a present-day port! The concept would still be fun, I think, a lot of solid gameplay ideas ripe for using again.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Here, check it out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostbusters_(Xbox_36 0_video_game) [wikipedia.org]
There are a few in engine action vids circulating around YouTube.
Now here is where a clamp down on Copyright would be good. This movie is over 20 years old. Why does one need to license the material to make a game about the movie world? As long as they stay away from trademark issues, then they should be good without having to pay a license
Re: (Score:1)
How'zabout "Generic Horror Or Spook Tale Killer"? THAT has a ring to it. Hmm.... call my agent........
Little Computer People was AMAZING (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, back in the days... (Score:5, Interesting)
Today, you can already feel lucky when you get a week of fun for every manyear invested.
Atari 2600 (Score:2)
That's cool but... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Isn't it ironic? (Score:1)
"A little too ironic...and, yeah, I really do think...
It's like RAIIIIIIN.."
Hooray for Fridays!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There was an Apple II port (Score:2)
I remember... (Score:1)
Now I see why it only took 6 weeks
Console bias (Score:2)
I loved this game! (Score:3, Funny)
Ghostbusters in only six weeks?! (Score:1)
Don't forget the Atari 8-bit! (Score:2)
Minimaxxers rejoice! (Score:1)
Sweet. The thought of minimaxing the tech development and customization of the blinking light ghost trap (as opposed to the positron collider* backpacks) such that, by the endgame, I can open one trap and suck down the nimble mynx in a 1-shot, makes me drool more than discovering a home video of Jessica Simpson and Shakira drinking a little too much, if you know what I mean.
* I know nobody has actually collided two positrons yet, with physicists thinking electrons
Angry Video Game Nerd (Score:2)
9 months! (Score:1)
east coast models [eastcoastmodels.co.uk]