[QUOTE=The Video Game Critic]
I was really torn between giving Pitfall 2 an A or A-. I think what pushed me to an A- was the fact that even if you flew under the condor at his highest point, his wing move down and hit you in the head. It was almost a random thing.
What do you think? Should I give Pitfall 2 an A?
Not counting homebrews, there are only a handful of VCS games that made it appear to be a sophisticated gaming machine. Pitfall II knocked it out of the park in 1984 and remains an elite example of how the 2600 kicked ass. I think it is an A+.....will settle for an A......and am mildly upset at the recent downgrade to an A-.
It's your world, Boss.......
Considering the year 1984, it's not too shocking that Pitfall II is so well done... HERO is also made really well, and many games for 2600 pushed the limits as years pass, like Midnight Magic, Pac-Man Jr, or Solaris. Amazing graphics, sound and controls.
Also since Pitfall was awesome for 1982, then the sequal 2 years later also made by Crane... should be right up there in terms of ass kickin' quality.
I thought the reason Pitfall II was going to be an A- minus, was the overall fun factor of the game, that the Critic questioned, with so many birds to nearly get hit by, too often.
I don't see the appeal of part II being considered better then I "in terms of fun", because there's no vines or pitfalls to jump over or any risk of losing in the game,... mostly part II is timing, running, waiting and once you figure the map, the timing in moving under or over birds/bats/frogs becomes easier... the replay value goes down.
Pitfall II is one of the rare games that almost everyone loves, but I sold mine and don't care if I ever play it again.