Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!agate!sandstorm.Berkeley.EDU!gmohr
From: gmohr@sandstorm.Berkeley.EDU (Gordon J. Mohr)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.games
Subject: Re: Armor Alley
Message-ID: <1990Sep30.013723.10936@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: 30 Sep 90 01:37:23 GMT
References: <5907@quanta.eng.ohio-state.edu>
Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator)
Reply-To: gmohr@sandstorm.Berkeley.EDU (Gordon J. Mohr)
Organization: ucb
Lines: 21

In article <5907@quanta.eng.ohio-state.edu> PAT@rcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu (Patrick Plaisted) writes:
>
>The graphics are almost as good as Solarian's.  The animation is a
>little choppy, but acceptable.  Acceptable, that is, on a mac II or
>better.  I wouldn't recomend this game if you're playing it on a classic
>mac.  I now see why Ben kept Solarian just on color macs: there ain't
>enough cpu cycles on a plus or se.  This fact makes Armor Alley *quite*
>sluggish there, but it's plenty fast enough on the bigger machines.

As one who beta-tested Armor Alley on an SE, I'd have to disagree with
the "*quite* sluggish" claim. While occasionally choppy or slow on a 
crowded screen, I wasn't bothered by it, even after I had a chance to
play it on a IIcx. It still feels a fast as the Apple ][ version, and
once you've played for a while, you forget about any speed concerns
(unlike some games, where they get more and more frustrating).

If any cycle-stealing debugging code remained in the version I tested,
then the released version is probably even faster.

-Gordon Mohr
gmohr@ocf.berkeley.edu