Subliminal Suggestion + Horse Race

Your Sinclair

Technical Ingenuity 84%

Achievement 69%

Crap Factor 99%

Fun 19%

Overall 20%

Rich Pelley 20%

OH NO, IT'S THE AWESOME ATTACK OF THE... YS READER'S GAMES Here at YS, we've recently been engulfed by an astounding number* of games that you, our lovely readers, have written and (if that wasn't disaster enough) sent in for our perusal. (Presumably so we could laugh at them as well. Ho ho, just joking.) Well, as you can probably imagine, at first we tried to ignore them but soon they were flooding in so fast that we just couldn't hold out any longer. So here, as a last resort (and we do mean last), is RICH PELLEY, who we've chained to a desk, and forced to play through your fine offerings to give us his 'expert' opinion. Take it away, Rich... (but don 't say we didn't warn you). *Nine, actually. Firstly, I'd like to say how impressed I've been with the standard of games you've sent in. But unfortunately I can't - 'cos they're all crap (hem). No, maybe that's a bit unfair. I was vaguely impressed with some (well, one actually). But the majority were crap, as you're about to see. But before I get down to some serious slagging, perhaps you'd like to know (though I doubt it) how the professionals do their stuff. Y'see writing a decent game ain't quite as easy as you may think. At a proper software 'house' (presumably a 'house' because they all live there or something) you have quite a few people working on the same game at once, all doing different bits and bobs. First, you'll find someone writing the code (the actual game) in machine code, probably using an assembler - all of which is very complicated and means you have to be extremely brainy to know what's going on. Of course, he won't be using a Speccy (seeing as it's terminally crap at this sort of thing), so a far more impressive computer which costs loads more and has lots more keys (and maybe even a pretty light if he's lucky) will be adopted instead, such as an ST. Basically this serves exactly the same purpose as our rubber-keyed chum, except that it's a little bit more user-friendly ('cos there's loads more memory) and far, far more importantly, it looks a lot more flash. As well as this, another arty-farty bloke (or indeed woman) will 'do' the graphics, whilst yet another writes a little ditty using lots of keyboards, funny black boxes and pretty lights (which is later ported into the Speccy). And, would you believe, it all costs rather a lot of money. Overall, I'd say (but don't take my word for it) that it takes around four months for everyone working full-time to write a game from start from finish - and some of them are still pretty naff after all that. But why on earth am I telling you all this, you may well be asking. Good question. Why did I tell you that? Erm... Ah yes. Well, now you can see what you're up against when you try to write a game yourself. I mean, I'm sure that someone cramped up in a decaying bedroom with a cold cup of coffee in one hand and a copy of Playboy in the other (well, that's how I do it, anyway), frantically trying to write a game won't get very far, if you see what I mean. Which all goes to show, um, something or other. So there you go. Now you know. 'ELLO, JOHN, GORRA NEW MOTOR? Still reading? Oh, good. Whilst sifting through the piles of games and things you've sent in I've (sort of) dropped them into three different categories. And here they are... First, there are the ones that are crap on purpose. Y'know the sort of thing - Advanced Yoghurt Carton Simulator and the like. Then there are the ones which are meant to be taken seriously, but are crap all the same. And lastly, well, there are the ones which really aren't too bad. (Take YS Capers, for instance, which we featured on the Smash Tape last issue - a game written at home by a YS reader for a bit of fun and sent in to us just like all these other games, the only difference being that Damian Scattergood is, of course, a professional programmer on the quiet, so he was pretty well sussed up). Not that any of this is at all relevant, of course. I just thought I'd stick it in so you'd think I knew what I was doing here. THE SCORES ON THE DOORS The usual scoring system seems a tad inappropriate here (seeing as it doesn't go below one'), so instead we've adopted a brand new one instead (ie I've just made it up). TECHNICAL INGENUITY Or 'How clever is the programmer?' Does the game boast wacky graphical routines, winy sound and decent playability? Or, erm, doesn't it? ACHIEVEMENT Did the prog achieve what it set out to do? Did it do a perfect job, or come a right old cropper in the process? FUN Is the game a laugh to watch and fun to play, or is it as boring as something that really is a bit on the boring side? CRAP FACTOR Erm, yes... Nuff said. OVERALL The overall mark is a sort of idea about how far the game would get if it was released at full price on a proper label - so it may get an extremely low mark even if I thought it was really good. If you see what I mean. Okay? (Just don't get hurt if I'm a bit nasty about your pride and joy - it doesn't make you a bad person or anything!) SUBLIMINAL SUGGESTION By John Lewis £2.99 (incl. Horses - see next page) from [redacted] Hooray! Civilisation as we know it (Jim) is going to change - and it's all due to this very program. No longer do you need to diet to lose weight, nor turn into a goo-dribbling wreck trying to give up smoking and drinking. Nope, kick that stress straight out the back door, relax and be happy, that's what John Lewis advises. And at the tidy cost of less than three quid for his handiwork who could disagree with the cheeky chappy? It's all a bit of a cinch really. Simply stare at your telly for a few minutes at this trippy-coloured circle while strange messages flash up in front of you. And that's it. Simple, eh? You'll then be able to go away and relax (man), give up drinking and smoking or whatever you desire. Brill or what? And should you get bored of staring at a circles, then you can, of course, stare at squares, or stars, or a variety of other things instead. "Sounds like bit of a con to me." you may well be thinking. But no - it really works. "Honest". Here's Mr Lewis to tell you why... "Y'see. It's all to do with subliminal perception - which (as if you didn't know already, ho ho) is the perception of stimuli too weak to be specifically apprehended but strong enough to be influential on the mental processes. What this means is that a sound that's lower than we can consciously hear, or a message that flicks up on the screen quicker than we can consciously see, is never-the-less impressed on the inner, unconscious mind. And that makes us feel like following the subliminal message." And there you go. Just the ticket Order a copy today! (The only problems are, first, that the stimuli aren't weak enough to be scientifically apprehended because even though they flash up on the screen very quickly anyone can read them and, second, that it doesn't actually help you do any useful things - like score with chicks, say. Still, a brave attempt.

Multicoloured Polo mints from Hell! (And this is supposed to make yo relaxed!?)

Well, what an excruciatingly brilliant feature that was, if I do say so myself - so good, in fact, that we'll have to do it again sometime. So if you've written a game or something (preferably not another one of those pesky lawnmower simulators though, and not just some utility or display - send them to JD's Prog Pitstop instead) and you're ready for some constructive criticism (ie a right slagging-off), then send it to me, Rich Pelley, at the Crap Game Corner, Your Sinclair, [redacted]. And no doubt it'll appear in the hallowed pages of a future issue of this fine publication. Byeee!!!

Your Sinclair

Technical Ingenuity 60%

Achievement 63%

Crap Factor 30%

Fun 40%

Overall 25%

Rich Pelley 25%

OH NO, IT'S THE AWESOME ATTACK OF THE... YS READER'S GAMES Here at YS, we've recently been engulfed by an astounding number* of games that you, our lovely readers, have written and (if that wasn't disaster enough) sent in for our perusal. (Presumably so we could laugh at them as well. Ho ho, just joking.) Well, as you can probably imagine, at first we tried to ignore them but soon they were flooding in so fast that we just couldn't hold out any longer. So here, as a last resort (and we do mean last), is RICH PELLEY, who we've chained to a desk, and forced to play through your fine offerings to give us his 'expert' opinion. Take it away, Rich... (but don 't say we didn't warn you). *Nine, actually. Firstly, I'd like to say how impressed I've been with the standard of games you've sent in. But unfortunately I can't - 'cos they're all crap (hem). No, maybe that's a bit unfair. I was vaguely impressed with some (well, one actually). But the majority were crap, as you're about to see. But before I get down to some serious slagging, perhaps you'd like to know (though I doubt it) how the professionals do their stuff. Y'see writing a decent game ain't quite as easy as you may think. At a proper software 'house' (presumably a 'house' because they all live there or something) you have quite a few people working on the same game at once, all doing different bits and bobs. First, you'll find someone writing the code (the actual game) in machine code, probably using an assembler - all of which is very complicated and means you have to be extremely brainy to know what's going on. Of course, he won't be using a Speccy (seeing as it's terminally crap at this sort of thing), so a far more impressive computer which costs loads more and has lots more keys (and maybe even a pretty light if he's lucky) will be adopted instead, such as an ST. Basically this serves exactly the same purpose as our rubber-keyed chum, except that it's a little bit more user-friendly ('cos there's loads more memory) and far, far more importantly, it looks a lot more flash. As well as this, another arty-farty bloke (or indeed woman) will 'do' the graphics, whilst yet another writes a little ditty using lots of keyboards, funny black boxes and pretty lights (which is later ported into the Speccy). And, would you believe, it all costs rather a lot of money. Overall, I'd say (but don't take my word for it) that it takes around four months for everyone working full-time to write a game from start from finish - and some of them are still pretty naff after all that. But why on earth am I telling you all this, you may well be asking. Good question. Why did I tell you that? Erm... Ah yes. Well, now you can see what you're up against when you try to write a game yourself. I mean, I'm sure that someone cramped up in a decaying bedroom with a cold cup of coffee in one hand and a copy of Playboy in the other (well, that's how I do it, anyway), frantically trying to write a game won't get very far, if you see what I mean. Which all goes to show, um, something or other. So there you go. Now you know. 'ELLO, JOHN, GORRA NEW MOTOR? Still reading? Oh, good. Whilst sifting through the piles of games and things you've sent in I've (sort of) dropped them into three different categories. And here they are... First, there are the ones that are crap on purpose. Y'know the sort of thing - Advanced Yoghurt Carton Simulator and the like. Then there are the ones which are meant to be taken seriously, but are crap all the same. And lastly, well, there are the ones which really aren't too bad. (Take YS Capers, for instance, which we featured on the Smash Tape last issue - a game written at home by a YS reader for a bit of fun and sent in to us just like all these other games, the only difference being that Damian Scattergood is, of course, a professional programmer on the quiet, so he was pretty well sussed up). Not that any of this is at all relevant, of course. I just thought I'd stick it in so you'd think I knew what I was doing here. THE SCORES ON THE DOORS The usual scoring system seems a tad inappropriate here (seeing as it doesn't go below one'), so instead we've adopted a brand new one instead (ie I've just made it up). TECHNICAL INGENUITY Or 'How clever is the programmer?' Does the game boast wacky graphical routines, winy sound and decent playability? Or, erm, doesn't it? ACHIEVEMENT Did the prog achieve what it set out to do? Did it do a perfect job, or come a right old cropper in the process? FUN Is the game a laugh to watch and fun to play, or is it as boring as something that really is a bit on the boring side? CRAP FACTOR Erm, yes... Nuff said. OVERALL The overall mark is a sort of idea about how far the game would get if it was released at full price on a proper label - so it may get an extremely low mark even if I thought it was really good. If you see what I mean. Okay? (Just don't get hurt if I'm a bit nasty about your pride and joy - it doesn't make you a bad person or anything!) HORSES By John Lewis (Available on the same tape as Subliminal Suggestion) As if we weren't spoilt enough already by finding a permanent solution to the world's problems, simply flip the Subliminal Suggestion tape over and you can become an instant millionaire. No really, 'tis true. All you have to do is buy a copy of The Sun, find a suitable horse race and tell this ingenious little program which horses are racing - hopefully you'll then be told which one will win. Then quickly mortgage your house, sell your belongings, draw your life savings out of the bank, pop down to the local betting shop and place all your dosh on that very horse. Blimey! Wealth beyond your wildest dreams! What could be more simple, eh, readers? However, being rich can soon get rather tiresome, so you'll probably want something to while away the hours with in between counting your vast amounts of dosh. And would you believe it, once again John Lewis has got the perfect solution - 'cos you can also play Horses as a game. Anybody seen those games you sometimes find at the end of piers where you bet two pennies on which colour horse will win as they all charge along this little track thingy? Oh, you haven't. Well, they used to have one at Weston-Super-Mare anyway. Okay, back to my point - the same sort of thing goes on here. First, carefully examine the predicted ground conditions and strategically choose which horse you think will win (ie hazzard a complete guess). Then bet between a quid and a fiver (of your starting 30 quid) and prepare to race. Each horse takes it in turn to jerk along a few steps at a time as you shout hopelessly for your horse to win. If your horse comes first or second, you win, otherwise you, um, lose. Believe me - the suspense is quite unbearable. Ho hum. As with Subliminal Suggestion, Horses serves its purpose (even if a little BASICally), and at a mere three nicker for the pair we're talking barg city here. I can't say I really feel any different after playing Sub, and Horses was all too much of a waste of time. But if these types of thing appeal to you then they could (perhaps) be worth a look.

And guess which horse I just put my money on. Okay, I'll give you a clue - it's grey and it's last. (Mmm. pity I just bet my home, my savings, my wife and my children on it then, isn't it?)

Well, what an excruciatingly brilliant feature that was, if I do say so myself - so good, in fact, that we'll have to do it again sometime. So if you've written a game or something (preferably not another one of those pesky lawnmower simulators though, and not just some utility or display - send them to JD's Prog Pitstop instead) and you're ready for some constructive criticism (ie a right slagging-off), then send it to me, Rich Pelley, at the Crap Game Corner, Your Sinclair, [redacted]. And no doubt it'll appear in the hallowed pages of a future issue of this fine publication. Byeee!!!