Osman / Cannon Dancer

[Dreamer]

Does anyone here have it? I'm on a quest for a neo 29 candy cab, and this is one of the first games I want to buy.

[Chicago Cheeseburgler Crew]

I have it.

But I forgot where I put it. I need to clean shit up.

[BIG]

Does anyone here have it? I'm on a quest for a neo 29 candy cab, and this is one of the first games I want to buy.

Good game,although unpolished,considering the amount of fuss and hype around it (Strider 1.5,true Strider sequel,etc.), but still pretty cool,nonetheless.

If you can find it at a decent price,defintely do give it a try.

BIG-

[eight one]

Good game,although unpolished,considering the amount of fuss and hype around it (Strider 1.5,true Strider sequel,etc.), but still pretty cool,nonetheless.

If you can find it at a decent price,defintely do give it a try.

BIG-

Spot on.

[Dreamer]

So, how is the gameplay exactly? And is it a big game?

[BIG]

So, how is the gameplay exactly? And is it a big game?

It's pretty much the same as Strider Hiryu,playwise.

BIG-

[Cnidarian]

this game looks pretty cool, I was actually thinking of picking up a copy myself..

this page has a few screens:
http://lscmainframe.topcities.com/osman.html

good to hear its basically another Strider (one of my fav.arcade games ever) :kekeke:

[The Chief]

I picked up the PCB last year, it's quite a game. Plays much like the first Strider but with tighter gameplay and graphics. The art style has a different feel than anything else I've ever played, it kind of reminds me of the movie Blade Runner. It's very cool, a board I'll never part with.

[droid]

How does Osman compare with the strider 2 pcb?

Droid

[BIG]

How does Osman compare with the strider 2 pcb?

Droid

Tom,stop looking at those friggin' Ebay auctions! :emb:

Oh yeah,and Osman > Strider2,especially if you're a fan of the original.

BIG-

[sven666]

if you like osman/strider then check out edward randy, mops the floor with the competition id say..

[Rade]

Yeah, Strider 2 was a big dissapointment, play and graphic wise. A mess.

How's the level design in Cannon Dancer? One of my favourite things about Strider is how you go from place to place in the same levels. Level two was snow, to a factory thing, to a giant run down a hill, to some other kind of power station, to floating platforms, to an airship. Always gets me giddy.

Does Osman have stuff like this?? No one's ever been able to answer that for me.

[ForeverSublime]

Yeah, Strider 2 was a big dissapointment, play and graphic wise. A mess.

How's the level design in Cannon Dancer? One of my favourite things about Strider is how you go from place to place in the same levels. Level two was snow, to a factory thing, to a giant run down a hill, to some other kind of power station, to floating platforms, to an airship. Always gets me giddy.

Does Osman have stuff like this?? No one's ever been able to answer that for me.

No, the levels are VERY short. The only level that does that is level 2... you jump up a series of "trampolines"... fight a miniboss... then have the classic run down the hill while being chased by a giant truck... a couple jumps on disappearing platforms, then a boss fight. It's all within the same setting, though.

You can go through the entire game in about 12 minutes if I remember right.

The levels themselves are designed around the enemy/platform placement. I will try to explain as best I can without video... but if you see me play the game it looks like I do the same thing every time. You could say, it's like a platform version of Pulstar.

And for those who don't know, Cannon Dancer was designed by the same person who created Strider (the arcade original), Isuke. The game was developed by my favorite company, Mitchell Corp.

Cannon Dancer has decent flow (you move from city to city, but there's a reason as to how you got there in the first place - it's not like "here's the snow level, here's the jungle level... as you would see done in Contra), and it does a respectable job of balancing the storytelling between in-game action and end-of-level cutscenes.


It's pretty much the same as Strider Hiryu,playwise.

BIG-

Mechanics wise yes (ninjaesque characters clinging to walls), but playwise not so much. If I could go back to my Pulstar analogy, Strider Hiryu would be a little more on the Blazing Star side of things. Strider has a little more randomness to it than Cannon Dancer. I'm just being picky.

[ForeverSublime]

if you like osman/strider then check out edward randy, mops the floor with the competition id say..

Damnit, it was you who said this? I can't believe it. Sven, I'm pissed. 666 style. Edward Randy is nothing like Strider/Osman, etc. The concepts are completely different. That's like saying Zelda mops the floor with Arkanoid. I'm not sure what genre I'd put Edward Randy in, but definitely not in the mix with Strider/Osman. There are some minor platform action sections... jumping around and dodging on boats/planes, but the front-view car/bull dozer/airplane levels (2/3/5 respectively?) are like a backwards game of Tempest where you're in the center and baddies are coming at your from around the edges. I think the game changes between those two ideas (as well as the ideas of single screen play and AUTO-scrolling platform play) and tries to blend them in the same level at times. I don't see any gameplay relation between Edward Randy and Strider/Osman (level design, mechanics). The only relation I see is the false idol of the gamer believing there's a human on the screen carrying a weapon.

You are no longer my best friend and you're not invited to my birthday party. :p

[BIG]

Mechanics wise yes (ninjaesque characters clinging to walls), but playwise not so much. If I could go back to my Pulstar analogy, Strider Hiryu would be a little more on the Blazing Star side of things. Strider has a little more randomness to it than Cannon Dancer. I'm just being picky.

So what's the difference between the two,then?

Lend us your expertise,if you will.

BIG-

[ForeverSublime]

I chopped this post down a great deal since there was a misunderstanding between BIG and I. You can read the full post where I was quoted below, or just keep to the meat of what's said.


So what's the difference between the two,then?

Lend us your expertise,if you will.

BIG-

Between the mechanics and the gameplay?

The mechanics are in the inner workings of the gameplay (button presses, "what you can do"). The gameplay is how they are implemented.
Osman/Strider are not completely different in gameplay, but there are distinct features in each that set the gameplay appart. Let's not forget about Osman's Powerup feature compared to Strider's option/tiger feature. Osman's powerup feature where you have multiple images of yourself works perfectly in the sterile preplanned structures of the level. You can "set yourself up" in specific places because you know an enemy will be there. Strider's powerups, with their own seemingly random behaviors, works great for the hysteria and rich enemy interactions.

Strider/Osman's differences aren't drastic, but when you get down to the grit you can see what makes them unique.

A game that everyone in this thread may enjoy is "RunSaber" on the Super Nintendo. It plays like Strider and maintains Osman's atmosphere. It doesn't play like Osman, though. ;) Heh, in all seriousness, playing that game may help get my view across best.

[BIG]

Between the mechanics and the gameplay?

The mechanics are in the inner workings of the gameplay (button presses, "what you can do"). The gameplay is how they are implemented.

We are so quick to judge a game on false idols. We see two characters sparring and we immediately call it a fighter. We have to break things down to a conceptual level. If you look at Tobal 2 - which is based on the "Golden Combo" system - in terms of mechanics it has more in common with Dance Dance revolution than King of Fighters. You wait until 2 sprites overlap each other and press the button to continue the stimulus. However, the gameplay implementation is vastly different between the two. When you look at the interpretation of the mechanics between Tobal 2 and KoF you see them as similiar games (you're "punching" or "kicking"). You see the same thing in "racing games". One racer may have you press a button as fast as possible while another has you pressing directional buttons at key points to avoid obstacles (or even as drastic as fine tuning your engine and calculating wind resistance). One racer may be a drag race while another relies on the control of sharp turns.

That specific example above may have not been the best way to explain my view by bridging two unlike games together, but the best analogy I can think of (specifically to relate to Osman/Strider and mention games you'd be familiar with) where there are two similar games that play vastly different is the Pulstar -> Blazing Star comparisson.

Osman/Strider are not completely different in gameplay, but there are distinct features in each that set the gameplay appart. Let's not forget about Osman's Powerup feature compared to Strider's option/tiger feature. Osman's powerup feature where you have multiple images of yourself works perfectly in the sterile preplanned structures of the level. You can "set yourself up" in specific places because you know an enemy will be there. Strider's powerups, with their own seemingly random behaviors, works great for the hysteria and rich enemy interactions.

More games that look similar but play different:

Vampire Killer (MSX) : Castlevania (NES). Pretty much the same sprites, just different quality. Similar mechanics between each other (walk, crouch, jump, attack, secondary weapon), but the level structure makes them completely different animals. In Vampire Killer you are searching in a Metroid like level structure for a key to open a door to the next level. In Castlevania you are working in a linear structure. How the game is expressed is important. If Vampire Killer were in a linear structure without free roaming and branching paths then it would be useless to be searching for anything, because you'd be bound to stumble across it regardless. In Vampire Killer, the enemies appear at the same spots at exactly the same times (and the key is at the same place, too). So you'd only complete that game when you'd mastered it... when you memorized every step and found the shortest route. In Castlevania you may get lucky and complete it, and then fail on your next 5 attempts.

Strider/Osman's differences aren't drastic, but when you get down to the grit you can see what makes them unique.

A game that everyone in this thread may enjoy is "RunSaber" on the Super Nintendo. It plays like Strider and maintains Osman's atmosphere. It doesn't play like Osman, though. ;) Heh, in all seriousness, playing that game may help get my view across best.

Nice breakdown,albeit lengthy and unnecessary. BTW,I was talking about the differences between the two games.

However,since the differences between both games are so subtle,I don't think anyone would even care to take notice,anyway.

Good times.

BIG-

[ForeverSublime]

Nice breakdown,albeit lengthy and unnecessary. BTW,I was talking about the differences between the two games,and not mechanic and gameplay.

However,since the differences between both games are so subtle,I don't think anyone would even care to take notice,anyway.

Good times.

BIG-

Whuuja? Differences between the games? I thought you played it. :cool: Whudda hella ya talkin bout? They're two different games - that's the difference. :tickled:

Edit: Although the differences aren't drastic, "subtle" holds less true. There are very distinct differences in gameplay, and people should care to take note.

And for you Strider fans, there's an X68000 version with an extra level.

[BIG]

Whuuja? Differences between the games? I thought you played it. :cool: Whudda hella ya talkin bout? They're two different games - that's the difference. :tickled:

No shit,I've had both of these games at one point,and to me,both games are pretty much the same in almost every which way. When you said there were "differences" between them,I just wanted to hear what these differences were,that's all.

BIG-

[ForeverSublime]

No shit,I've had both of these games at one point,and to me,both games are pretty much the same in almost every which way. When you said there were "differences" between them,I just wanted to hear what these differences were,that's all.

BIG-

Well, I'm a sucker for the final word. I just don't get what you're talking about. I think "different" defines itself. They are different just as SamSho1-Warrior's Rage... Double Dragon 1-3, etc. Better yet - Magical Drop - Money Idol Exchanger. If they were the same then everyone would like them equally.

Okay, okay... how about this:

Cricket : Baseball
Rugby : Football

Look similar, different rules.

Kung Fu : Karate... etc. I won't shut up.

Edit: Damnit, I see you watching. "Thai : Cambodian"

[BIG]

Nevermind,I'm done arguing.

BIG-

[ForeverSublime]

Nevermind,I'm done arguing.

BIG-

Arguing? "Discussing". There's a BIG difference.

[BIG]

Arguing? "Discussing". There's a BIG difference.

You're calling it a discussion,whereas I'm calling it an argument,since this isn't going anywhere. Anytime there's a disagreement,a simple discussion can turn into an argument,just like what had happend here.

Your point?

BIG-

[ForeverSublime]

You're calling it a discussion,whereas I'm calling it an argument,since this isn't going anywhere. Anytime there's a disagreement,a simple discussion can turn into an argument,just like what had happend here.

Your point?

BIG-

You win?

Nice little detail in Osman: When you're chained down to be eaten by the sand monster in the desert you can wiggle your joystick and Osman will struggle to break free. It doesn't do anything, but it's a nice detail.

Edit: Actually, my point is that I'd be a little ticked if I made a game and someone didn't notice the differences. I think we owe it to the developers to enjoy every detail we can. It's a hard job - especially for a small company.

[sven666]

Damnit,blablabla. :p

first off.. tempest!?!?! wtf :P

and yeah i think gameplay wise these games are pretty similar.. jumping around and clinging to stuff.

i dont understand how anyone can dislike mr.randy this much.. :loco: i think the game is brilliant and very original.. especially in the graphics dept..

ed: i actually havent played osman.. sacrificed a fair share of credits on the striders tho..

[ForeverSublime]

first off.. tempest!?!?! wtf :P

and yeah i think gameplay wise these games are pretty similar.. jumping around and clinging to stuff.

i dont understand how anyone can dislike mr.randy this much.. :loco: i think the game is brilliant and very original.. especially in the graphics dept..

ed: i actually havent played osman.. sacrificed a fair share of credits on the striders tho..

Damnit, you and Chai are both nuts.

http://img192.echo.cx/my.php?image=inversetemest6ad.png

Inverted Tempest. I had to break out MSpaint. Half of the levels are set up that way. I think the car sequence is very cool, but I don't think it belongs in the game (though I would rather have the car sequence fine tuned a bit more than have the Bulldozer). The game could VERY WELL work as just a single screen game where you attack enemies and swing around to get out of situations and put yourself in better possitions. Only 2 levels make good use of that, and that's what I see as the gameplay's strong point. The game didn't need to be a scrolling platformer, which it wasn't for the most part, but the developer should have fine tuned the level design to fit with the gameplay. Osman and Strider are both very consistant in that department.

I don't see the graphics as being original...? The scrolling backgrounds in the driving sequences and the sprite rotations are the only effects I can see. Everything else is standard fair. There was some "ballism" on one boss. The scrolling has been done since Night Driver (Atari, 1976). Ballism was pretty popular (using several spheres together to make a snake's tail, etc) as was sprite rotation. It was very hip at the time. I guess 1990 could be at the head of that era. I was thinking late 80's, though. I think the graphics themselves look very nice, especially as still shots.

The powerup system in the game is the saving grace for me. If I understand it correctly, I bet if you don't get hit the entire game you can kill the boss in one hit... special ending?

First impression - the game lacks focus. The game reminds me a bit of Bayou Billy in that respect, and although there were many different types of sequences in Bayou Billy it worked just fine (scrolling fighting, light gun, driving). If the game just toyed with the "inverted tempest" concept and tried to stretch it to its limits rather than break those limits or abandon them altogether then it could have been a spot on game. Then you'd be perfectly in the right, Sven, calling it brilliant and original. I can see that perfectly well.

I'm a huge fan of consistancy. I like playing a game and thinking, "Man, this reminds me a lot of Starfighter Sanvein" (subliminal: that sentence has an agenda). I see games like sports with a specific set of rules. When a game has a conceptual focus there is reason to replay it and practice. When a game accomplishes that with the reason not only for the player to compete but to simply enjoy himself as well then it breaks the barrier into being a good game. When someone is the best at Ninja Spirit it matters because there is consistancy there (it takes a simple concept and stretches it - adds vertically scrolling levels and an inverse gravity level). When someone is the best at Grand Theft Auto there's no reason to give a damn. The problem with Edward Randy is that it is neither one of those. It's in the middle. It goes from a strong concept to being a gimmick.

[ForeverSublime]

The game reminds me a bit of Bayou Billy in that respect




I like playing a game and thinking, "Man, this reminds me a lot of Starfighter Sanvein"

:angry:

"in that respect" was my safety net. "in that respect".

[BIG]

Damnit, you and Chai are both nuts.

http://img192.echo.cx/my.php?image=inversetemest6ad.png

Inverted Tempest. I had to break out MSpaint. Half of the levels are set up that way. I think the car sequence is very cool, but I don't think it belongs in the game (though I would rather have the car sequence fine tuned a bit more than have the Bulldozer). The game could VERY WELL work as just a single screen game where you attack enemies and swing around to get out of situations and put yourself in better possitions. Only 2 levels make good use of that, and that's what I see as the gameplay's strong point. The game didn't need to be a scrolling platformer, which it wasn't for the most part, but the developer should have fine tuned the level design to fit with the gameplay. Osman and Strider are both very consistant in that department.

I don't see the graphics as being original...? The scrolling backgrounds in the driving sequences and the sprite rotations are the only effects I can see. Everything else is standard fair. There was some "ballism" on one boss. The scrolling has been done since Night Driver (Atari, 1976). Ballism was pretty popular (using several spheres together to make a snake's tail, etc) as was sprite rotation. It was very hip at the time. I guess 1990 could be at the head of that era. I was thinking late 80's, though. I think the graphics themselves look very nice, especially as still shots.

The powerup system in the game is the saving grace for me. If I understand it correctly, I bet if you don't get hit the entire game you can kill the boss in one hit... special ending?

First impression - the game lacks focus. The game reminds me a bit of Bayou Billy in that respect, and although there were many different types of sequences in Bayou Billy it worked just fine (scrolling fighting, light gun, driving). If the game just toyed with the "inverted tempest" concept and tried to stretch it to its limits rather than break those limits or abandon them altogether then it could have been a spot on game. Then you'd be perfectly in the right, Sven, calling it brilliant and original. I can see that perfectly well.

I'm a huge fan of consistancy. I like playing a game and thinking, "Man, this reminds me a lot of Starfighter Sanvein" (subliminal: that sentence has an agenda). I see games like sports with a specific set of rules. When a game has a conceptual focus there is reason to replay it and practice. When a game accomplishes that with the reason not only for the player to compete but to simply enjoy himself as well then it breaks the barrier into being a good game. When someone is the best at Ninja Spirit it matters because there is consistancy there (it takes a simple concept and stretches it - adds vertically scrolling levels and an inverse gravity level). When someone is the best at Grand Theft Auto there's no reason to give a damn. The problem with Edward Randy is that it is neither one of those. It's in the middle. It goes from a strong concept to being a gimmick.

Jeez,shut the fuck up already..nobody cares :loco:

BIG-

[ForeverSublime]

If you don't care then stop playing games. I mean that. If you have no fire in your belly to spark something new then you're not helping anyone - you're not helping the guy who created the thread and you're especially not helping the developers. I'm sick of 99% of people's attitudes on the forums. All people want to do is promote themselves and say "I like that game" or "I don't like that game" and not give reason why. That's why list threads are so popular and there isn't any other damn person piping up in this thread for more than a sentence. Nobody is interested in a discussion. There's no theory or philosophy worth talking about. It's that attitude that gets most of these uninspired games out on the market today. Edward Randy is inspired. It's in a class of its own. It has potential. Why has nobody heard of it? Why wasn't something like it attempted again? Because people don't want to talk about it. They just want everyone to "shut the fuck up".

I was joking about the "argument - discussion" thing above, but there's a great deal of truth in what came out of that statement. You can have the mindset that an opposing view is an argument with a negative connotation or a positive mindset that there's a discussion at hand. Nobody is mad at each for seeing things in a different light, but that's the way we act so we close ourselves off from explaining our thoughts. "Speak the fuck up".

[BIG]

If you don't care then stop playing games. I mean that. If you have no fire in your belly to spark something new then you're not helping anyone - you're not helping the guy who created the thread and you're especially not helping the developers. I'm sick of 99% of people's attitudes on the forums. All people want to do is promote themselves and say "I like that game" or "I don't like that game" and not give reason why. That's why list threads are so popular and there isn't any other damn person piping up in this thread for more than a sentence. Nobody is interested in a discussion. There's no theory or philosophy worth talking about. It's that attitude that gets most of these uninspired games out on the market today. Edward Randy is inspired. It's in a class of its own. It has potential. Why has nobody heard of it? Why wasn't something like it attempted again? Because people don't want to talk about it. They just want everyone to "shut the fuck up".

I was joking about the "argument - discussion" thing above, but there's a great deal of truth in what came out of that statement. You can have the mindset that an opposing view is an argument with a negative connotation or a positive mindset that there's a discussion at hand. Nobody is mad at each for seeing things in a different light, but that's the way we act so we close ourselves off from explaining our thoughts. "Speak the fuck up".

Again,nobody cares..:rolleyes:

*goes back to playing DDP*

BIG-

[ForeverSublime]

Again,nobody cares..:rolleyes:

*goes back to playing DDP*

BIG-

"DDP sucks".

Chai, how many of your posts are longer than 1 sentence? How many of those provide a thought? There's a difference between being a smart ass like I was above and being an asshole.

Dude, you used to have something to say. Seriously, if you don't have anything to say then don't say anything - much less post on other people's behalf.

[BIG]

"DDP sucks".

Chai, how many of your posts are longer than 1 sentence? How many of those provide a thought? There's a difference between being a smart ass like I was above and being an asshole.

Dude, you used to have something to say. Seriously, if you don't have anything to say then don't say anything - much less post on other people's behalf.

Cave > Mitchell

My thoughts ain't cheap,so one run-on sentence is all you'll ever get from me :glee:

BIG-

[ForeverSublime]

Cave > Mitchell

My thoughts ain't cheap,so one run-on sentence is all you'll ever get from me :glee:

BIG-

Alright. At least your ass is smiling. Give me the brothers who post their heart out or the lurkers who keep stoic - not this trying to play both sides bullshit.

Toaplan > Cave

Even though Guwange is one nasty game to contend with.

;)

Go play some OutZone.

[BIG]

Go play some OutZone.

Sold it.

Someone buy my Tatsujin II,pleaze.

BIG-

[ForeverSublime]

Tatsujin II,pleaze.


Man you own some crappy games. I bet you have doubles of Dynasty Wars.

[BIG]

Man you own some crappy games. I bet you have doubles of Dynasty Wars.

Guwange >Fixeight>Gundhara>Chuka Taisen

BIG-

[ForeverSublime]

Guwange >Fixeight>Gundhara>Chuka Taisen

BIG-

That's the first thing you've said that makes any damn sense (guwange = damn good). Are you getting all of this, Dreamer?

[Dreamer]

Fuck yeah.

[Neorichieb1971]

I have an Osman I will sell, comes with the flyer.

[NeoCverA]

Mame is emulating Osman/Cannon Dancer now.

Give it a test.