Rad Racer - In-depth Written NES Review With Pics/Gifs
Rad Racer
Nintendo Entertainment System - Fall of 1987
Square/Nintendo
$39.95
*Shown/played as designed, 60hz NTSC, 4:3 aspect ratio
*If pics show artifacting, zoom in/out (CRT effect)
In a time when cleanliness and safety were merely an afterthought to the powers of Darwin, we used to get toys straight out of the cereal box. Perhaps wrapped in plastic, though just as likely to have been tossed in the buff. Any rudimentary thought put into safety measures were likely negated once our germ laden hands went gold digging deep into the boxes crust. If they really wanted you to buy the cereal they'd guarantee a prize, however it was generally the childhood equivalent of a slot machine. Would we be hitting the jackpot today? This plastic chocking hazard of a toy, which by now was likely buried in the mountain of sugar which had fallen off your mini-wheats, I'd imagine cost the manufacture less than a dollar to produce. If anything were to cost more than that, they'd likely pull a bait and switch, forcing us to "collect" 5 or 10 proofs of purchases before claiming our reward through mail. With the entire process taking upward of a year to complete, they were likely praying upon our lack of persistence to follow through, guarantee they got more money out of the few who would, and hope that enough time passed for the offer to expire.
Anaglyph 3D is a process which dates back to 1800's black and white photography, involving two slightly offset images which have been separately filtered both in the original image, as well as upon viewing. Historically the famous colors used when viewing these images were red and "blue", though technically the blue is cyan, at least when viewing in color. Images in need of more subdued or realistic colors may have used green and "pink" (magenta) as a substitute, or even yellow and blue. When viewed wearing appropriately filtered "3D glasses", the image pops up at you, and has long been considered a fairly effective form of creating 3D from two dimensional images. It was used in pictures, it was used in films, and it was even used in a few video games, such as the 1987 Nintendo classic, Rad Racer. If you were to have bought the game new for 40 dollars, the glasses would have been included in the box. However, buying it used for 15 bucks, I had not been so lucky. The manual, which did happen to be included with my cartridge, had long been psyching me up to try the 3D for myself. At the time it wasn't as easy as going onto Amazon and buying a pack of 3 for $3.95 (current price), you could only luck upon something like that in the wild, since anything which had use of it would have had it included. But circa 1990 I was finally able to procurer a pair by stuffing my face with enough cereal in the allotted time, and sending in the proof. Within two days of use with Rad Racer, I threw those glasses away, with intense furor, into the trash!
^Picking from an F1 or a Ferrari, the first courseThe 3D is not the best feature of Rad Racer, and it's rather unfortunate considering it had been so heavily advertised by Nintendo. As a kid all I knew was that it didn't work with the game, and I felt cheated because of that. In retrospect I wish I had kept the glasses around to use on other things, for it turns out it had nothing to do with my personal "perception" of the effect. When I use anaglyph 3D glasses with images and movies, they do their thing and they're fun, but what works there simply doesn't work here. When anaglyph is working correctly, your two eyes see two separate images, and this is easily confirmed by merely shutting one of your eyes. With Rad Racer the blue/cyan image actually shows parts of the red image, meaning it was simply never implemented correctly. Beyond its weak (if any) 3D effect, it personally caused flickering and gave me headaches. What was even meant to be seen in 3D isn't particularly much; just the background parallax, other cars (not yours), a portion of the road, as well as obstacles like rocks and signs. Even if the 3D had worked, huge sections of the screen having no implementation of it, as well as simply seeing your car at all (even if it was in 3D), ends up ripping you out of the experience.
In Japan it had been originally sold for use with a 3D add-on which used clear glasses, perhaps through a polarizing setup, though I'm not sure. My guess is that it was haphazardly converted for anaglyph, and had no business being included in the North American release, other than to use as false advertising. Pushing the 3D mode off to the side, it would be foolish not to place Rad Racer among the best NES games of all time, and I'd personally claim it as the definitive "racer" for the system. It was only through loving the game already which made me even want to try it in 3D, and long after those glasses made their way to the dump, a persistent lingering would continually draw me back. At it's core, Rad Racer is an obvious clone to the Sega arcade hit Out Run, Nintendo's questionable advertising rearing its head once again, by showing the game in a "car like" cabinet with shifting gears that do not exist for this title. I don't personally understand Nintendo's innate desire to lie about the game, since it's more than worthy to stand on its own, an opinion I believe fits the objective facts.
^San Francisco at night, drifting between 3 carsDoes Out Run feature multiple mechanics which involve intentionally hitting other vehicles? Well, since so much as touching a car in that game will instantly result in a crash, I'd say that's a resounding "no". One of my favorite strategies as a kid was to "ride" the asses of some of the faster cars. This was especially true if the car was in the middle lane, and the others seemed to be consistently taken as well. Since there can only ever be three other cars on the road (besides yourself), and only one can occupy a single lane, if all lanes were filled then you knew nobody was going to switch lanes. So long as the car you were riding was fast enough, this would allow you a bit of protection in your quest to the next check point. Toward the end of the game the timer becomes a bit too tight to successfully win using this method, but it was a good learning tool at the time. An advanced strategy as an adult is to intentionally ram their ass, so as to slow your car down less than braking outright would have, and "perhaps" to speed up the car you hit slightly.
Hitting cars on their sides behaves in a much different manner than a direct slap to their behind. I'd say that a majority of my crashes were caused either through accidently hitting a car on its side, or intentionally doing so, but not having quite worked out what the effect was going to be. A number of times while playing I "thought" I had a handle on how it worked, but whenever I re-watched the footage I ended up perplexed. At times I was thinking that while turning left, if you hit a car on its right, you'd be thrown one lane to the left, and the opposite would be true when reversing directions. Then my conclusions would be thrown afoul when I saw myself turning right, but also hitting a car on its right, which seemed to throw me off toward the left. And that could very well be the intended outcome, that two rights make a left in one situation, while each car going in different directions changes things. I was also wondering if maybe there was something more, involving whether I hit a car on the left-rear as opposed to the left-side, or the front. At times I was thrown two lanes away, not just one! If you happen to be in the middle lane when that happens, you'll crash. I never quite put together what caused two lanes of travel, though I had enough of a handle for the overall "feel" of side swiping that I could react in a way where I generally came out for the better. You can take advantage of the quick lane shift, as often this is happening in tight situations, finding yourself suddenly in an open lane.
Sometimes I could get past three cars which were close together by starting a turn fast enough in the inside lane. By the end of the turn you'll find yourself in the outer lane, the other vehicles de-spawning behind you. This is drifting, and while also present in Out Run, it's nowhere near as important since crashing will not necessarily result in an end to your play session there, since you can quickly start from a crash. It doesn't work like that in Rad Racer, where it is a massive time suck to view the crash animation and to get placed back in the middle of the road. If you're wanting to win, the single most important mechanic to master is drifting. And it's not as simple as going as fast as possible while avoiding crashing, it's about delicately balancing these things. If you're taking a turn at 250 km/h (max speed), even a perfect drift could easily result in a crash. Obviously this is a game inspired by another, and even with Out Run you can go all the way back to Pole Position for a similar style. Built upon what came before, Rad Racer makes the presented experience unique to itself.
^The Grand Canyon and Athens
For a game which comes off on the surface level as a straightforward car racer, and thus dependent on reflexes, there's a surprising amount of depth to this title. Of course you'll be needing your reflexes throughout, which is made all the more difficult using the original NES controller. The older I get, the more I actually can't stand that thing, despite loving it at one time. With the buttons and form factor as tight as it is, the design was obviously catered to children. It turns out that even as an adult it's often the best way to play difficult games, due to the quick access to those buttons. But agronomic, it is not, it can physically hurt to use that controller in a game like this, as an adult. My reflexes remain as strong as ever, but I never beat Rad Racer as a kid, and that's because there's a deeper depth of strategy required which reflexes alone cannot breach.
Strategic use of the brakes would probably be my best piece of advice for winning. The timer is brutal, yet you can't be afraid to brake. At one point it was feeling as if the better I got at the game, the worse I was doing. I had seen the beginning courses so much that by the time I reached the later levels I became cocky, feeling I could blast through at top speed. I'd end up hitting a car the wrong way then veer off the road, or I'd take a corner too fast. Through those fast speeds I was also introduced to what might be the game's most unfair mechanic; Stalled vehicles, or at least effectively stalled because of how fast you're going in relation to them. With the stalled cars they seemed to have been scripted to show up in the same spots of a given course. It's not guaranteed they'll be there, since any car already in that lane takes precedence over the scripted spawning. I took particular note of these cars on the two "cityscape" night levels, though I believe they "can" be present in any level, it's just harder to notice them earlier on. At one point I had just recovered from a crash, saw one these stalled cars while going 5 mph, and even at that speed touching them would cause an instant crash.
^From America to Greece, don't try to make sense of itIn addition to the scripted and stalled cars, there are ones which are technically moving, though in relation to you are acting with the same effect as the stalled cars. The better you get at the game, the faster you're going to go, and the more likely you'll come across these slow cars, even on the first level. If you touch them at those higher speeds, the normal bumping and side swiping mechanics will not apply, and you will instantly crash. I say this is an unfair mechanic because up to this point the game has taught us that it's okay to touch the other cars, that in-fact it's a good idea for you to do this strategically, and to at least be prepared for them to do it to you, so that you might respond defensively. I began intentionally hitting as many cars as possible so they'd either slow me down, or throw me to a different lane, only to crash and be left confused as to why. Thus ended my "maximum speed" attempts at the game. You have to know when to brake.
In my lead up to actually winning the game, I could be on a straightaway on the very first course, but as soon as I hit the max speed of 250 km/h I'd "tap" the brakes. This would instantly decrease my speed around 30 km/h, and soon enough you'd be back at max speed, where I would then tap the brakes again. It gives you that extra second to consider your current situation. Approaching a turn while going just a little bit slower; now I can make sure I'm ready to perform a drift, where as before I'd have to slam on the brakes while already in the turn, if I even survived. It's a very smooth and fast game, and when three cars are coming your way it's that extra second of being able to examine their behavior which might wind up keeping you alive. It's about developing that feel of the balance of speed as well as braking, in relation to the brutal timer. For a racing game on the NES which was heavily advertised to children, there's obviously more than mere reflexes under the hood of this game.
^Apparently "Los Angeles", looks like Vegas to me, elevation changesYou start the game with a choice of vehicles; either a "328 Twin Turbo Ferrari", or an "F1 Machine". Other than an aesthetic change to both your car as well as other's, there is no mechanical difference between these choices. They have the same top speed, same handling, there is not even a difference in challenge; with one having a more lenient or strict timer. It's really not even a matter of perceived beauty or art, since playing as the F1 means every single car you see will also be using your exact sprite. With the Ferrari you'll face VW Beetles in the first course, Corvettes in the 2nd, Lamborghinis in the 5th, and so on, but with the F1 you'll only ever be seeing your exact sprite in every single course. There wouldn't seem to be any difference in the AI of those cars either, not compared to F1's on the same courses. But since nothing else matters, the simple visual change alone is enough to definitively say that the only intelligent choice would be to use the Ferrari. Choices which aren't choices, a favorite in the JRPG world as well (subtle jab at Square). What more can I say? I don't appreciate having choices which have no objective OR subjective reasons to exist.
Graphically I don't find Rad Racer to be anything special, although it has its moments. The background features two layers of parallax, with one meant to be perceived as closer, the other further away. Scrolling slower on one level might be clouds, with a body of water whizzing by on the other layer or parallax. On another level sky scrappers could be moving slowly while you turn, while the billboards are going so fast they're difficult to read. I especially love the cityscapes, where there's an "out of focus" appearance to the buildings, at least when viewed on a CRT television (not with emulators). The 7th level might be my favorite, with its gorgeous cloud layers that I'd say look better than many 16-bit titles. Those levels aside; I find many of the others to be rather bland. Two levels which are primarily made of sand, with just a sliver of parallax showing some water? The "Grand Canyon" comes off as the saddest and flattest of mountains, not a canyon, colored in dull browns. Similar with flat mountains, though colored slightly better with added Roman architecture, is the Athens level. While I didn't care for those, there's also the snow level, which probably should have filled me with similar underwhelming reflections, but it just so happens I enjoy snow covered mountains. Even if they were mostly a palette swap of other levels. 
^Snow!
^Snow!While merely a trick, there's also a great "sense of" elevation change in Rad Racer. In addition to the scrolling which occurs when you're turning left or right, there's also a vertical scrolling. Your car remains centered in the road, but the foreground layer can scroll up and down. When scrolling down while drawing the road larger, suddenly you can feel as if you're on an upward climb, with limited visibility. Scroll up while drawing the road narrower, and you're now coming down a hill with a mere pixels representing cars spawning in the distance. For a trick it works fairly effectively, and again comes off better than some 16-bit games which couldn't even be bothered to fake it. Most levels feature a day/night transition. Perhaps they're meant to be perceived as inclement weather, since the same level becomes dark only for it to brighten back to daylight before you've finished the course. But since there's no actual rain I couldn't personally see it as anything other than the passage of time. None of the cars (including yours) are animated, simply switching between three angles. Often times the other cars display a noticeable flicker as they're scaled closer to you. While demonstrating impressive graphics at times, overall I'd place this below average.
There's a choice of three different musical tracks, as well as having the option for just sound effects. I'd say the music is good, and maybe even call them great if it weren't for how you go about hearing them. Pressing down on the D-pad changes the song. Other than when I was first playing around with the game, I never actually meant to change the thing! Most of the time you're pressing up to use the turbo, while at the same time going left and right. Reflexively when braking hard you're probably going to hit down a few times, since you're moving your thumb away from the turbo. Generally I preferred to have the music off, but whenever I had to brake and turn quickly, suddenly it would pop on, or if it was already on it would change tracks. At times it was comical, because you'd be coming out of a crash with the music now taunting you. It should have either switched tracks with the different courses, or let you choose at the start what you'd prefer. As for the sound effects, they're fine for what's there, and there's nothing annoyingly repetitive, often a problem with racing games, but they're not great either.
Rad Racer was originally released in Japan for the Nintendo Famicom, with Wiki giving the exact date of August 7th of 1987, though their release citations are generally awful, as we will soon learn. The original name was "ハイウェイスタ", or "Highway Star" in English. It was developed and published by Square, who would go on to have great success, with the same designers, in the JRPG world through the Final Fantasy series. They had already built a decent history with RPGs on the PC-88, which was a popular computer in Japan. Many "histories" of the company point to a title like this as an odd departure of style, given their RPG leanings. I don't see it as that odd for them, personally. Their PC-88 titles show a clear influence from Ultima, at least the RPGs do. They also made some "Japanese Adventure" games, which I even saw falsely described in some "histories" as "hentai". They're not in the least bit explicit, but it is standard for that genre to show scantly clad women. On the NES there was "The 3D Battles of World Runner", taking heavy influence from Space Harrier. Rad Racer, of course, is influenced by Out Run. Do you see where I'm going with this? The style was never "RPG", it was "take what others have built and build upon it." You see it to this very day with Square, as they make more Final Fantasies, as well as remake what they've already made. When you look at it that way, Rad Racer seems like a perfectly logical title for them.
^Look at those clouds go byIn America, besides being renamed, it was published by Nintendo themselves. Wiki claims it was in October of '87, with, as always, highly questionable citations. The earliest review I could find in America was from Computer Entertainer, and that was in November of '87. As a newsletter, it might be "possible" that the game had come out in October, if they had an extremely quick turn around time. But it's also possible that while it "claimed" to be an issue from November, that it was actually on the stands in October. Magazines and newsletters sometimes operated like new cars would; The "2000" models actually releasing in "1999", not 2000. To sound newer they might date in advance. In the console world many magazines actually had advanced "beta" copies, but computer publications such as "Computer Entertainer" generally had the integrity to tell you it wasn't a final build. To me September or even August feels more likely, since it's not like there was much to translate. I'm not saying October is definitively wrong, I'm saying if it's true then there needs to be better citations. Ones which don't just take you to a different website which also have bad citations (that's Wiki). As there are no advertisements saying we should "Line up at your nearest mall for the release of Rad Racer, this October 12th!", I have to go by "feel" in terms of when the reviews were coming out, placing it before the review so they would have time to actually get and write their articles.
As for what those articles had to say; Computer Entertainer dived heavily into the 3D aspect of the game. "The glasses don't do much... When the 3D feature is on, the screen becomes dark and somewhat colorless, in spite of the fact that the effects are fairly decent." "We quickly found ourselves switching out of 3D and enjoying the game in normal mode." They couldn't stand it to the point they quickly switched back, yet there's that strange dichotomy of also saying the effects were good, which makes no sense to me. "The graphics... are quite good and reminiscent of Sega's Out Run." "All in all it's a good, fast racing game, however... Nintendo should forget the cardboard glasses..."One editor gave it 2 and 1/2 stars, another gave it 3. The early Nintendo years tended to be rather sad, at least in terms of "journalistic integrity." Nintendo itself was the main driving force with "Nintendo Power", and before that with "Nintendo Fun Club News". A full on "review" was given, which amounts to nothing more than recreating the propaganda from the back of the box, or the manual. A later issue even let reader's give their little mini-reviews; "...I really think it's hip! I think Rad Racer outruns you-know-who, every time."
The brainwashing was to be expected in terms of the company who was selling the game, what's even more pathetic was that most of the "independent" console based magazines acted in a similar manner. Game Player's Buyer's Guide to Nintendo Games said "Take the wheel of a mean machine. Drive it as fast as you can stand or go flat out for victory in this transcontinental race." Nintendo might as well have written that garbage themselves. Video Games and Computer Entertainment wrote "Fire up your engine in this exciting race against the clock." "You get to drive everything from a VW Beetle to a Ferrari", that statement being an outright lie. "You can even select the 3D option to really get into the driver's seat." You guy's wrote that one yourselves, did you? They gave action, graphics, music, and playability scores of 4, while giving strategy and sound 2. Their words didn't even attempt objectivity, and if you've read this far you'd know I don't agree with their scores either.
^ We won!The only decent review I found was actually from Britain, Computer and Video Games from July of 1988. To touch upon release dates again, Wiki, through their bad citations, claims Rad Racer was released for Europe in January of 1988. While this was the only review I could find over there, and I'd certainly like to have a few more to estimate its release, I find it unlikely it would have taken them 6 to 7 months to review this game if it actually came out in January. Why would it take so long to release in Europe compared to the time between Japan and America? Nintendo launched the NES late in Europe, and there was much more competition with computer systems there, perhaps factoring into the often laughable passage of time. "...a purists car racing game. The emphasis is speed, finesse on the brakes, and gutsy reflex" "You can accelerate using the A button but have to use the turbo to stand any chance of completing the courses." "The hazards to watch out for are road dips, steep bends, and cars that just love to roll across in front of you." "I really do love this game. Outside of Victory Run for the PC Engine THIS IS THE DRIVING GAME TO PLAY. It is mindbogglingly playable..." Graphics 5, sound 5, playability 8, overall 7.
They loved it, but they loved it honestly and with integrity, as do I. It's not hard for a writer to discern the differences between genuine writers and those who are selling something. If not being paid directly from the company, then through the manipulation or placating of their own fans, their own mini cult, hoping to appeal to you, so that you'll join Patreon. It's also easy to tell those who are writing to provoke responses, because your anger drives up engagement, which is money for them through ads. And it's just as easy to tell those who are writing for the love of writing, as well as for games. I believe there's far too much selling, far too much provoking, all being falsely presented as reviews or histories. Let's take a page from the newspapers of old, and write for the love of writing as well as for truth. That means showing the love when it's there, but never kissing a game's ass! Criticizing when you should, without the relentless frivolity. To bring it all together by thinking in terms of others, not yourself. Will you like Rad Racer? If you like racing games, it's an obvious yes. From my point of view it's not only the definitive racer for the NES, it's one of the best titles period. It's brutal to win, but I happen to find it hard in all of the ways which make you want to come back for more. Gifting you with quite the animated cutscene upon winning, it's also rewarding to play. The 3D was a stupid gimmick, and its implemented terribly, nobody is going to play this for more than 5 minutes with those glasses. It's also a blatant clone, if there was no Out Run then there would be no Rad Racer. I'm not going to whitewash the truth, but it does enough differently to stand proudly on its own. Rad Racer is an excellent game.
Beyond this written article, I did a full video review for Rad Racer, where I dive into more of the history of Square, read from the manual, as well as the reviews mentioned, responding appropriately, because reviewers should also be reviewed. As this is a driving game, perhaps it might be nice to see it in action and witness me beat it for the first time. Readers of this might be interested in a couple of my other NES reviews, such as Castlevania, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, or Duck Tales. Generally I cover computer titles like King's Quest (Amiga), StarFlight (Amiga), or Ultima (Commodore 64). Other racing games I've covered include World Circuit (Amiga) ,and Test Drive II (Amiga, video only).
Comments
Post a Comment