From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2a64b/2a64b421c2090d036727942ad14e2b23cc362128" alt="Famicom style controller" |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
|
Start |
This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
CVG To-do:
- Expand: New CVG Articles, Normality, Pac-Man World 2, Operation Flashpoint: Elite, Call of Juarez, Galactic Civilizations II: Dark Avatar, Ford Street Racing, Betrayal at Krondor
- CVG Peer Review: List of F-Zero titles, Kya: Dark Lineage, Wii Remote, Dynasty Warriors 4, The Sims 2, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Kirby's Dream Land, Electronic sports, Fire Emblem, Dante (Devil May Cry), The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Final Fantasy XII, Sonic the Hedgehog (16-bit), Classes in World of Warcraft
- Cleanup: Age of Mythology, Mario Kart: Double Dash!!, Betrayal at Krondor, List of Nintendo trademarks
- Merge:
- Deletions / Essential articles / Magazines
- Assess and Prioritise articles (Log)
|
I would buy one of the Sega/Genesis systems if they re-released that game, it was that good, IMO.
Just expanded the article greatly with considerable wikification and external links. I think this game is more historically important than Wikipedia has heretofore indicated (but maybe it's just that I liked it as a kid). Anyone have the resources to get a good screenshot we can use? --Matt McIrvin 13:08, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
"Surprisingly, Solaris on the Atari 2600 was more visually advanced than the original Atari 800 version of Star Raiders."
Is this an error? Why should it be surprising that a later game is more visually advanced than an earlier one? Trinite 21:08, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
- It's surprising because the Atari 800 is a significantly more advanced system than the Atari 2600. Clayhalliwell 18:40, 3 July 2006 (UTC)