PowerPlayGoal.com – Hockey From A Different Angle

Some of you folks reading this may remember a crappy logo I ranted about that belongs to a team over here in the UK, the Romford Raiders. In that issue of War On Logos, and in the very last paragraph, I mentioned their junior team, the Romford Spitfires, and I also mentioned how their logo was better than what their parent team uses:

See, this isn’t a bad logo at all, and I’d go as far as to say that it’s one of the best logos a British hockey team has ever used, unless of course it’s a generic piece of clipart, has been blatantly stolen borrowed from a professional team (which I can’t seem to identify) or copied off of an old propaganda poster from World War II (which I highly doubt). Maybe it’s a tad bit too detailed to be a sports team’s logo, but I like it anyway. But wait, I just said that the Spitfires’ logo was better than their parent club’s. What did I mean by that?

To keep a long story short, earlier this year and just after the hockey season ended, the Raiders organisation folded, taking their junior teams with them. After a very brief trip to the grave, they came straight back, somehow keeping everything intact from the previous year in time for the 2009/10 season. And rather than give the Raiders a fresh new start, like giving them a much needed identity overhaul with a decent new name and logo, like the one above, they even kept that the same as well, and instead took the opportunity to rebrand the wrong team, i.e. the Spitfires.

Readers, what you’re about to see is one of the worst name and logo combinations a hockey team has ever had. Because the logo below is so bright and garish, I would personally advise you to grab the nearest pair of sunglasses before you scroll the page down any further. Failing that, you could instead turn down the brightness of your monitor. I may also go as far as to advise you to stop reading this article here.

And since you insist on continuing to read it, here it is. But I will not be held responsible for any damage done to your eyes. I did warn you.

I would love to know what they were smoking when they approved of this horrible, horrible thing.

I’m under the assumption that someone within the Raiders organisation has read the article I previously wrote. Because I commented on the fact that the Spitfires had a better name and logo than their parent club, they seemingly out of complete spite went and rebranded the Spitfires with this horrendous logo and newly renamed them the Romford Fury.

The name doesn’t completely go against the Raiders’ apparent tradition of naming their junior teams after aircraft types, since the Fury were (or at least, I’m guessing they were) named after the Hawker Sea Fury, a fighter plane used by the Royal Navy in the Second World War… but who is going to know that? The Sea Fury is not as widely known as the Spitfire is. Everybody knows what Spitfires are, even this generation’s children. In fact, ‘Spitfire’ is used by members of the general public who visit war museums as a catch-all term for similar looking aircraft, including the Sea Fury, only until they are corrected by their grandparents or the museum staff.

And if I didn’t know any of the above, I’d be slating the new name as a ridiculous and extremely generic sounding name. But even when knowing where the name came from, it’s still very stupid and generic. It reminds me of the stereotypical “tough-guy” sounding names a hockey team might be given in a cartoon or comic, like “the Brawlers”, “the Bullies”, “the Demolishers” and “the Fury”… oh, wait.

Now to start tearing the logo to shreds, starting with the unnecessary wordmark. Notice that the “Y” at the end has a ‘tail’ for whatever reason, making it look like a weird “Y” and “L” hybrid (Furyl? Is that even a word?). The text is bending inwards, and I can kind of understand why they did this. It’s because it’s a function in Photoshop, and the designer was thinking “It’s there, and I’m feeling a pointless impulsive urge to use it, therefore I must use it.” Well, it was either that or they were going for a tacky, cheap and generic cartoony look; much like a lot of other UK based teams. Also, if you look carefully you will see a yellow outline around “Romford”, which does not even need to be there, and only makes the wordmark look even more garish.

Speaking of colours, they seem to have for whatever reason gone for a nasty bright blue and orange combination, something that belongs back in the 60’s and 70’s and not in this era, instead of their parent club’s blue and gold. Something else that belongs back in those decades is that completely random blue and orange rainbow shape behind the plane, which in turn is green, and doesn’t even match the team’s colour scheme.

Finally, the Spitfire Sea Fury plane. I myself don’t mind teams that go for a cartoony image, but this is just completely over the top ridiculous. I can’t help but feel that the plane is a generic piece of clipart (the crossed sticks on the front, with a thicker outline than the plane kind of give that away), even if they actually hired somebody to draw it. It’s hideous, and the colours, as I mentioned before, do not match with the rest of the team’s identity. Oh, and look at that, the plane is on fire. On fire. That’s not a very good sign at all.

Stupid identities like this are my single biggest gripe with many UK based teams. It’s great that we get our hockey fix, but not so much when teams bastardise and tacky up the game, seemingly for the sake of it. I have no idea what they think when coming up with this crap, but it certainly doesn’t get them any merchandise sales from fans like us at PowerPlayGoal.com who take the game seriously.

I’m Wildwing64, and I declare War On Logos.

Welcome to a special edition of Reviewed, featuring a classic retro hockey game.
This edition, I will be reviewing Hat Trick, produced in 1987, by “Bally Sente inc.”, licensed by Capcom. It was produced first on Atari 7800, then ported to Dos, and Commodore 64. I will be using the Dos version for my review.

Hockey games have come a long way since the first consoles in the late 80′s, 3d graphics, sound tracks, realistic sound effects, player licensing etc. And apparently according to some people, we are forgetting the most important aspects of what a hockey game should be – Two teams battling it out against each other trying to get the puck past the rival goalie.
Now I am sure that this hockey game utopia would be great, however, 5 minutes of playing Hat Trick made me want to reinstall NHL07 on my PC (possibly one of the most unreliable and buggy versions of NHL ever).

The startup screen is unmistakably 1980′s DOS. No fancy graphics, just text white – on a black background.
Presented to you are an array of fun options.
F1 – Start Game (Well this ones obvious)
F3 – 1 Player (Choose to play the computer, or an unfortunate friend)
F5 – Player 1 Right Keyboard (Your key choice, doesn’t seem to make much difference)
F7 – Sound On (You may want to turn this off, the sounds are terrible)
F8 – Choose Team (Your choice, USA or USSR – ooh decisions…)
F9 – Exit (The best option, seriously)

(Highly exciting menu screen)

So after choosing your (few) options, the game begins, and without warning its started. Controls are stupid – simply use the up and down keys to control your goalie, and the left and right keys to control the player.
To get the puck, it seems to have to get in the way of the opponent. Not an easy task when the other player is darting around the rink as if he had just drunk two gallons of espresso.
Scoring is notoriously hard, unless you are a computer player, as is saving a puck from going in the net. The controls are contrived, inefficient, and complicated to use fast.
Graphics are possibly the highlight of this shoddy venture, and even thats saying something, because they are truly terrible. The player sprites look like hockey players – sort of, and I feel the marks left as you skate across the rink are a nice touch (I had to say something positive…).

(Intense action on the ice)

However, this is where my positive points end.
Firstly, team colours are cyan for USA (why…?) and pink for USSR. The hockey goalies look like some bizzare turret, getting ready to fire, and the zamboni at the end looks like a nazi machine of war.
The game itself lasts for about 30 seconds, no extra periods, no overtime and no shoot-outs (this is 1987…)
The sound effects are shockingly poor, even for 1987, with a simple blip sound being used for every single sound effect.

(The Nazi War Machine Zamboni ends the game)

And that pretty much brings this short review to a conclusion. Theres not much else I can say really, theres no other modes, features or functionality.

I would not say it is worth your time, however, if you google Hat Trick, I am sure you will find a copy. You will also need DosBox to run the game. (though I am also sure you can find the Commodore 64, and Atari 7800 versions too)

Verdict: 1/10 – painful

Im KevKev, and this is PowerPlayGoal.com

Welcome to The Definitive Fan – The online guide from PowerPlayGoal.com to the types of fans who you’re likely to meet (or not meet) at a hockey game.
Some of these fans clearly have a true passion for the game, others, well, they are just there for something to do.

Fan Type #6 – The Tourist

Game programs are usually a favourite piece of merchandise for tourist-type fans.

Bio:
So you have a friend who’s going on vacation, and you happen to notice that they’ve picked a city that’s home to an NHL team. Your friend may have never seen a game in their life, nor had any prior interest in the sport, so being a huge hockey fan yourself; you quickly recommend that they go see an NHL game.

Apparently going by your recommendation – although there’s no guarantee of them doing so – your friend will then attend a game, and chances are they will have enjoyed themselves. But again, there’s no guarantee. After they’ve been on vacation for however long, they will come home and you will encounter one of the following scenarios:

A: They’ll have enjoyed the game, seemingly developing a casual interest in hockey in the process. In future, they may still claim that they are a fan of one of the two teams that they saw play, usually the home team, otherwise they won’t show many, if any signs of interest, thus creating Tourist Fan Type A.

B: They’ll have really enjoyed the game, so much that they’ve picked up as much merchandise as possible, gone out of their way to learn about and cherish the history and traditions of the team, and they’ll seemingly be a fan for life (although chances are this could merely be a post-vacation stage). Don’t like the team they’ve chosen? Or are you now finding it annoying how they’re always bringing up some great event in the team’s history that they talk about as if they saw it yesterday? Well, tough, because you’ve just created Tourist Fan Type B.

Characteristics:
Well, come on. They’ve just come home with at least a jersey of their new favourite team. Or some other team memorabilia to remember their holiday by, like a game programme. Tourist Fan Type A however, will most likely seem more generic, and will have no distinguishable characteristics.

Favourite Team:
Depends on where they visit. A common choice for British Tourists for example would be the Tampa Bay Lightning, or maybe the New York Rangers.

Other:
Scenario A above will occur more commonly than B, although there may have been a few rare cases of the latter.

I’m Wildwing64, and this is The Definitive Fan.