Oids (Atari ST)

Oids is a rubbish name for a game. What kind of Oids? Androids? Humanoids? Haemorrhoids? You need to be more specific with these things.

Still, despite that obvious flaw, Oids has gained a reputation as one of the ST's finest games. That being the case, it's always been high on my list of games to play for the blog, despite not having a clue about what kind of game it is.

It's actually a bit of a mixture of games. There's a fair bit of Thrust there, a little bit of Lunar Lander and some Choplifter. I would actually say, having played this, that Gravitron 2 (and probably the original) was as much inspired by this as Thrust.


That's the way. Clear a nice little landing space.

The Oids of the title, so say the instructions, are android slaves (see? Why didn't it say this in the title?) that you need to free from their prisons and rescue. They're held across many different planetoids (oh... more than one type of Oids... now I see), and you must fly in in your V-wing ship to rescue them. As you would expect, it's not as easy as it sounds...

Having said that, at first, it appears as though it is as easy as it sounds. I was quite disappointed as I was able to fly around at leisure and at no great speed, picking off ground installations as I pleased and rescuing Oids with the greatest of ease. The pace was extremely slow and the game was very easy... I couldn't see why this was so highly regarded.


I flew into one of those little sun things once. Don't know where I ended up.

But once I'd got a few levels into the game, it all kicked off. Reverse gravity has a massive effect as you're trying to negotiate the landscape, ensuring you have to take things carefully. Installations will fire at you, as you would expect. They're more devious than that, though... some will launch homing missiles, whereas other, hidden installations will appear and launch a barrage of firepower at you.

Luckily, as you would expect of any game where you control a V-shaped spaceship, you have a limited shield. And of course, you can fire back. You've got your normal peashooter bullets... effective enough to take care of most ground installations. For those things where you need a bigger bang, you've got a mushroom-cloud-laying mofo of a bomb. Satisfying.


Argh! Erm... alright, I get the message!

Once you fill up with rescuees (eight) or clear the planetoid of captives, you can dock with your mothership and deposit the Oids to safety. It's a simple and tried-and-tested gameplay mechanic, but it usually works, and when it's particularly well done as it is with Oids, it's a joy.

When Oids first started, I was expecting a fast-paced blast. It's not like that at all, it's far more measured and a little bland to start with. But a few levels in, it becomes a real challenge and a real test of your gaming skills. Although it's not really a shoot 'em up, it certainly becomes frantic as you try to fend off the planets' defences and rescue the poor, downtrodden Oids. I've had a lot of fun with this game... I can see myself playing it for a long time to come.

Time Bandit (Atari ST)

I must have heard the name "Time Bandit" for twenty years now, without having played it. I definitely remember reading a review of the Amiga version in ZZAP! that sang its praises very highly, but it didn't excite me overly as I didn't reckon there was much chance of me ever playing it. Of course, I didn't bargain for emulators back then, did I?


Snakes. Why does it always have to be snakes?

I haven't got the Amiga version of this, but I just fancied giving it a go, so off to the Steem Engine I went. On loading it up, I was a touch underwhelmed. It seemed like a cross between Gauntlet (which I quite like) and Tutankham (which I hate). A mixture of "quite like" and "hate" would not appear to be the recipe from which a good game is made. Still, I plugged away, wondering if there would be a bit more to it than that.

There is, and there isn't. The gameplay doesn't exactly change... you run around mazes, shooting critters and collecting keys and treasure. But it's not a soul-crushingly hard as Tutankham, and it's a bit more interesting than Gauntlet, as well as being less overwhelming. Although it's challenging, you're given a bit of room to breathe.


Waka waka... what's going on here?

Time Bandit is also set up in a more interesting way. To start with, you wander a small map which features around twenty locations, ranging from pyramids to amphitheatres to spaceships. There's even a Pac-Man area, which is a bit weird. It doesn't really fit, but it adds a little bit of variety, I suppose.

When you enter a location, you'll soon find that it doesn't take long to complete it. Initially that's a bit worrying, but you can re-enter a location once it's been completed and you'll find that you get an entirely new level. Yep... there are something like sixteen levels in each location. That's more like it.


Are you not entertained? ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?

It's not all simple blasting (or dot-eating), either. Certain locations add complications, whether relatively simple with the addition of ladders to split levels or more involved... for instance, once aboard a spaceship, the computer will probe you for answers or information before allowing you into certain areas, or outside you might find a farmer who appears to want to sell you a sheep...

Time Bandit is a good game, with enough of its own ideas to distinguish it from the games I mentioned earlier. It looks and sounds a bit rubbish, and the actual playing area only fills about half of the screen, but that doesn't matter at all. Once again, a lucky dip into an unknown past has proven successful...

Plutos (Atari ST)

The more I delve into gaming history, the more it's becoming apparent to me just how influential a game Star Force was. I just thought it was a polished arcade shoot 'em up, and originally I thought I was the only one that gave a toss about it. Over time, I've found others who revere it as I do, which is great, but there are more clones of this great game than I'd realised, too.

Plutos is one such clone. Not a game I'd heard of until recently, but I was recommended it as a good game for the blog. The name was all I had to go on... I didn't even know what kind of game it was. So it was a very pleasant surprise to start the game and find a variant on Star Force... I just felt like a bit of a blast, as it happened.


Not a clone, but a "Space War Arcade Simulation", says the back of the box. OhhhhKaaaaay...

There's no doubting that source of inspiration. Right from the off, you've got a Star Force-shaped ship, Star Force-like enemy attack patterns, and Star Force-like ground bases and installations. As you progress, you've even got the question marks that you shoot to try and reveal extra lives. It's all very, very familiar.

Still, if you're going to steal, steal from the best. Plutos does add a hint of originality by giving you limited fuel, meaning that you have to keep your eyes peeled for fuel dumps on the ground, and naturally, in one of gaming's great anomalies, blasting these tops up your supply.


The message is clear. You know what you have to do.

It's standard fare, but it is very playable and, crucially, you make a little more progress with every game... an essential ingredient for any quality shooter. I would have loved to have owned this when it was released (and if I'd had one of the computers it was released on)... it would have made the long wait between trips to the arcade all the more bearable. And while it's not as good as the game that inspired it, Plutos is most definitely one of the better home blasters I've played from its time.

Spindizzy Worlds (Atari ST)

Oh, how I remember Spindizzy on the Commodore 64. Massive Gold Medal in ZZAP! 64, plaudits left, right and centre, lovely isometric 3D graphics, teeth-gnashingly hard gameplay. It probably didn't help that comparisons were drawn between it and Marble Madness when, as ZZAP! quite rightly pointed out, they don't play anywhere near the same.


The way it used to be. Difficult, but excellent.

I did buy the original, and I played it quite a bit, probably more down to the fact it cost £9.95 than through my great love of the game. I wasn't very good at it. I imagine a lot of people weren't very good at it. It was a huge game, with hundreds of screens which you "flicked" through, one at a time. I think I managed to complete about a quarter of it, which was probably actually quite good, now that I think about it.

Spindizzy Worlds is not a game that would have been high on my list of must-buys, back in the day. It actually got a release on the SNES as well, research shows. That makes sense... the ST version actually looks a bit like a SNES game. And it seems more like a console game in structure. Whereas Spindizzy just saw you exploring one huge landscape, Spindizzy Worlds, as the title suggests, is split into levels. Well, worlds, actually. Of course.


Coloured switches, lifts and jewels. What more could a gyroscope want?

This affords the game the opportunity to be a bit more varied than the original, and it takes that opportunity by having distinct-looking worlds. Some are lush with greenery, some are drab and concrete, some are blue and watery... you get the idea.

It also means that Spindizzy Worlds plays a little differently. Oh, sure... the game still involves piloting a gyroscopic craft around troublesome scenery, picking up energy crystals in an attempt to prolong the game. But it's generally a much more puzzly affair than the original. Or should I say, the puzzles are a bit more structured, with each world having specific goals that need to be completed before progressing to the next.


And they're under starters orders in the Spindizzy National...

Occasionally, the game will edge towards its Marble Madness leanings, and throw in some timed levels. These are short, and not particularly difficult. But they add a little bit of welcome variety to the switch-pressing that dominates the majority of the game.

So, Spindizzy Worlds is a more accessible, more structured game than the original. But is it better? Well, despite the fact you can save the game, I don't think it is. It does have irritations... the biggest of which is the "scrolling" method. The original game was a flick-screen affair. This game is flick-screen too, but it also scrolls at times, which is a bit weird. Why didn't they just make it scroll all the time? The method used here just serves to disorientate you a bit.

Spindizzy Worlds is a fine game, but somehow it didn't quite grab me as I'd hoped. That doesn't mean I won't play it again... I'm wondering just how big the game is for one thing. But I don't really think that it's the classic it could have been.

Full STeem ahead!

My posting has been curtailed a little lately, but that's likely to be even more the case over the coming month, with the World Cup in full swing. I love the World Cup... well, I love most footy, but the World Cup is an awesome event, even if it's almost certainly destined to provide disappointment for me as an England fan. But I'll be watching as much of it as possible, regardless.

So, how to play and write about games in the midst of this? Well, I've only just managed to retrieve my Atari ST emulator and games from my old PC. This is very handy, as I can sit at the laptop, playing and writing, and keeping tabs on any matches I might want to watch.

I'll be using STeem, the emulator, and trying to find a few ST-only (supposed) classics, or maybe playing some of the games I have that don't work on the Amiga. I think I'll do this for a solid week, and then vary things a bit. So, a week's worth of ST games are on the menu! Hope you and I enjoy!