Centipede and Millipede Review

By Kristan Reed Published 10 May, 2007

Legs and co.

Version tested: Xbox 360

I hate to bring this up, but my conscience just can't let this one go. Three years ago, Atari rather generously (and sensibly) packaged together all of its 70s and early 80s output into one great value Anthology package. Released on the Xbox and PS2 , this exhaustive compilation featured an impressive 85 games in total, comprised of 67 Atari 2600 games and, more interestingly, 18 arcade titles from the era. All the early Atari favourites were there: Tempest, Battlezone, Asteroids, Crystal Castles, Missile Command, Gravitar, and even really old stuff like Pong and Super Breakout. Oh, and Centipede and Millipede. For the retro completest who hadn't dabbled in MAME (is there anyone left, seriously?) it was a well-rounded offering, even if revisiting many of these titles was a pretty harrowing experience in reality.

And although it might not seem like the most obvious Xbox 1 game to work on the 360, it has been compatible for some time now. With retailers desperately trying to clear any remaining Xbox stock for hilariously low prices, the chances are you'll find Atari Anthology languishing in in bargain bins for less than a fiver if you're lucky.

With that in mind, such unheralded retro compilations such as this kind of take the shine off the prospect of forking out almost as much for a small segment of what it offered years ago. But that's Xbox Live Arcade's approach to retro gaming for you, and it drives us every so slightly 'round the twist every time we see it happening.

For the price of a cup of tea

'Centipede and Millipede' Screenshot 1

Evolved, not revolved: the new look in all its glory.

On the other hand, people are very fond of reminding us that £3.40 (or whatever 400 Microsoft points are worth where you live) isn't actually a lot of money. Only a price of a large beer, or a rip-off cup of coffee, you might argue. That's true enough, and would be fair comment if gamers hadn't already been repeatedly re-sold these same retro offerings for pennies a few years before, so don't get me started on that one. [Too late - Ed].

But anyway. If we can pretend for a moment that these previously released great value compilations never existed, then Centipede and Millipede's joint arrival on Xbox Live Arcade is something we grudgingly welcome. For a start, it signals that publishers are starting to realise that trying to foist these old relics on us one at a time is a bit cheeky, and that they might have to make a little more effort than usual (i.e. not just shovel it unaltered) to pique our interest.

After all, Centipede and the harder, faster, more evil sequel Millipede were unapologetically basic shooters, with the simple novelty of having a trackball controller (a novelty you can't replicate at all on a standard 360 pad, obviously, but not to any massive detriment to the playability). Even back in 1980/81they were the sort of instant thrill games you'd have fun with for ten minutes but tire of and go and play something else. That was the beauty of the arcade - that non committal, low attention span ability to trawl all the machines. The inherent problem with both these games is they're very much 'in the zone' type shooters, where unless you're exceptionally good at them, the nostalgic fun you can glean from them evaporates in a matter of minutes. That's where the trial version comes in handy, naturally.

Get me away from here, I'm dying

If for some reason you've never played the game, it couldn't really be much simpler. You man a cannon at the bottom of the screen, and try to shoot the segments of a rapidly descending Centipede (or Millipede - they look basically identical) before it reaches the bottom of the static play area. At first it's pretty easy to knock out the segments (and surrounding 'mushrooms'), but within a few waves the 'garden' becomes beset with bouncing spiders and other creepy crawlies whose sole purpose is to hinder or destroy you. As ever, the old 'one-hit-kill' mechanic ensures that survival is down to a mixture of blind luck and ninja skills, as you bob and weave frantically to move your cannon out of the way of a myriad of incoming instant death. It's fun, frantic, pure, but too quickly down to factors outside of your control as to how long you survive. Unlike other arcade shooters of the era, there's no discernible pattern to how things pan out (correct me if I'm wrong, you know you want to), so it's tempting to blame the game when things go wrong. But like any popular arcade game, it was there to extract money as quickly as possible, not to be fair.

'Centipede and Millipede' Screenshot 2

Back to the old school: the way we were.

Millipede took the whole concept to a rather hardcore and pretty manic extreme, with a far more deadly set of challenges and meaner enemies that might have appealed to those already insanely good at Centipede, but left everyone else with a bloody nose. No wonder Atari felt comfortable throwing it in alongside Centipede for nothing.

In both cases, the emulation is absolutely spot-on, just as you'd expect, down to the correct sound effects and so on. Anyone familiar with the arcade cabinet or MAME will acknowledge that there's very little to fault here with the exception of the loss of the trackball precision, but it's not a massive loss unless you're a hardcore player.

A space boy dream

Interestingly, Atari has gone down the road of making 'evolved' versions to complement the classic original editions, and we're happy to report that they work very well. In most instances you'd probably take a horrified look at a re-skinned version of an old classic, and quickly switch back to the original, but Stainless deserves credit for not screwing these up. The most important element - the gameplay - remains utterly unchanged, but the graphical and audio revamp somehow gives the bug squishing a more solid, fresh feel. Maybe it's the squelchy explosions that vibrate through the pad, or the fact that the (much larger) bugs now actually look and move like they should. Whatever it is, it doesn't elicit the horrified responses that you normally emit the second you see a reworked retro game. For possibly the first time since these old games started appearing on XBLA, you might actually prefer the new version with its vile luminous explosions and unpleasant sound effects.

'Centipede and Millipede' Screenshot 3

Millipede: with added DDT for TOXIC DEATH, 1982 style.

Add the new super-speeded up modes, and you can frazzle yourself stupid trying to clock up improbable scores to win some rather amusing achievement points - things which all Live Arcade games ultimately live or die on.

Absent this time, however, are the pointless co-op or versus modes which so many retro games seem to have shoehorned in for no good reason - so you're merely left with a few leaderboards to prove your prowess in the two modes of both games. Tellingly, not many people seem to be rushing to download this one - even in its 'extra value' form. Nevertheless, the sooner publishers start realising that bundling several titles in the same retro download makes them more attractive, the less we'll continually moan about the pricing. We're bored of mentioning it too, you know.

Nice day for a sulk

That aside, Centipede and Millipede are the sort of simple, repetitive, no frills shooters you can get more than enough fun out of by playing the free trial version of, so we should be grateful to Microsoft for allowing people to find out why they probably shouldn't bother with this one. If, on the other hand, there's a significant part of your gaming psyche wrapped up in the nostalgia value of playing 27 year-old arcade games, then fill your boots - it's another spot-on conversion with a decent reskin to enjoy, so add a few more points if that's you.

5 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Kristan.

About Kristan Reed

Kristan is a former editor of Eurogamer, dad, Stone Roses bore and Norwich City supporter who sometimes mutters optimistically about Team Silent getting back together.

Read more articles from Kristan by visiting the Kristan Reed archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (48) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Tejstar #1 5 years ago

    I used to love centipede on my speccy! Can't see myself buying this though...

  • keenest #2 5 years ago

    I've put in a good few hours playing Centipede and Millipede since its release last week. The reskinned Evolved versions of the game are seriously good, and much better than the normal Digital Eclipse efforts. I just wish there was a way to put of the constant rumble of the gamepad though, as I fear for the controllers battery live.

  • Max_Powers #3 5 years ago

    Oh come on! Centipede and Millipede? For crying out loud! How laughable should Markeplace content get?

  • Blerk #4 5 years ago

    5 seems very generous. They weren't even that much cop back in the early 80s.

  • krudster #5 5 years ago

    The reskins make it work, Blerk. Otherwise it'd be in 3 territory.

  • Overlush #6 5 years ago

    A joke IMHO. People should be voting with their wallets and refusing to buy this dated bile.

  • Dizzy #7 5 years ago

    Even 27 years ago I could not get into this.

  • Bidermaier #8 5 years ago

    Belle&Sebastian FTW!!!

  • MrBiggles #9 5 years ago

    Couldn't they think of any older games to put on arcade?, I mean there must be something WORSE, if only they looked I'm sure they could have found even more crappy games.

    oh well

  • PlugMonkey #10 5 years ago

    Why is it that when I click the big blue Eurogamer logo in the top left corner it tells me the site is down, even though this is blatently untrue? That's my favourite way of returning to the front page. :(

    Centipede? Meh.

  • Killerbee #11 5 years ago

    I had Centipede (or a clone of it, anyway) on my Spectrum 48k and to be honest, I think I got bored of it after about 3 or 4 goes back then...

    And whilst £3.40 isn't a lot of money, I'm surely not the only one who remembers when you could buy a game that was infinitely more sophisticated than this for £1.99 on a Spectrum / C64 tape.

    Plus if we're talking about retro gaming, it's roughly half the price of Zelda: Ocarina of Time on the Wii Virtual Console, and clearly a long, long way from being half the game, so I don't see how that price can be justified in any way.

    Then again, I don't own a 360, so I don't really know why I'm so bothered...

  • Killerbee #12 5 years ago

    Why is it that when I click the big blue Eurogamer logo in the top left corner it tells me the site is down, even though this is blatently untrue? That's my favourite way of returning to the front page. :(

    Works OK for me. Have you tried clearing out your temp files?

  • Hog-lumps #13 5 years ago

    And whilst £3.40 isn't a lot of money, I'm surely not the only one who remembers when you could buy a game that was infinitely more sophisticated than this for £1.99 on a Spectrum / C64 tape.

    True but what about inflation?

  • barchetta #14 5 years ago

    These two reminded me of pissing wet through Sunday family outings in smoky old pubs in a backwater like Withernsea... The machine sticky with spilt beer and a nice collection of fag-burns on the cab. A choice of this (in cocktail mode) or some one-arm bandit wankery to while away the hours of boredom.......

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #15 5 years ago

    Using this handy site:

    [link url=http://img.thisismoney.co.uk/calculators/calcPrice Inflate.html
    ]http://im g.thisismoney.co.uk/calculators...[/link]

    I worked out that £1.99 from 1985 is equivalent to £3.62

    or £5.11 from 1980.

    I'm not exactly sure what that proves, though.

  • menage #16 5 years ago

    I played the demo, hammering like a madman on the A button, then suddenly the demo stopped and it switched to a buy now screen also activated with the A button!!!!!!

    I almost bought the demo BY ACCIDENT! Good grief for the lag on the dashboard. I was still hammering away.

    Deleted it immediatly. Waste of time anyway.
    Edited by 1 at 10/05/07 @ 10:07

  • haowan #17 5 years ago

    Nice paragraph headers, more B&S always welcome

  • Killerbee #18 5 years ago

    @hog-lumps:

    I take your point about inflation, but we are talking about a 27 year old game here, so paying the "equivalent" price in today's terms to what you might have paid back in 1980 doesn't really follow, imho.

    It's like paying today's PS3 asking-price for a 48k Spectrum. You just wouldn't, would you? :)

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #19 5 years ago

    That 8/10 score for Pac-Man gets to be more and more of a liability by the day, eh?

    Centipede alone is a far more sophisticated and challenging game than Pac-Man (which, at the end of the day, is just about memorising patterns).

    Here it also comes with Millipede, which looks much the same but has an entirely different character, because it was specifically designed by Atari to beat the people who could play Centipede all day on one credit by entirely changing the tactics you needed to use to win.

    There's "Throttle Monkey" mode, a new setting where speed and difficulty is cranked up to the max for an insanely intense game that's over in about 15 seconds.

    And Pac-Man was completely unenhanced, whereas here you get a spiffy modern respray that makes everything look zappy and neon and exciting.

    And all that adds up to three points fewer? Silly.

    As for the people moaning about the price, for God's sake - when Centipede came out, this price would have equated to about £1.32. Would you have paid £1.32 for enhanced home versions of TWO state-of-the-art coin-ops in 1980? Of course you would, and you wouldn't have believed your luck. So stop whinging about it now. It's not competing with Dead Rising, that's why Dead Rising costs 15 times as much.
    Edited by 1 at 10/05/07 @ 10:27

  • PlugMonkey #20 5 years ago

    Aha! Cheers Killerbee. For some reason, that didn't occur to me. :)

  • PlugMonkey #21 5 years ago

    As for the people moaning about the price, for God's sake - when Centipede came out, this price would have equated to about £1.49. Would you have paid £1.49 for enhanced home versions of TWO state-of-the-art coin-ops in 1980? Of course you would, and you wouldn't have believed your luck. So stop whinging about it now.

    And nowadays I would still happily pay £1.49 for TWO state-of-the-art coin-ops. In fact, I'd pay £3.40 for them. It's paying that much for TWO creaky-old-crappy coin-ops that causes the moaning.

    It's not just games. I wouldn't pay top whack for an Austin Allegro or a keyboard tie nowadays either.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #22 5 years ago

    Thing is, they're not "crappy". Gamers today just have a terrible case of axis snobbery. Centipede is more sophisticated and more challenging than Geometry Wars, but nobody whines about the price of Geometry Wars, because it plays in two axes compared to Centipede's one. It's a superficial and lazy view and deserves no respect.

  • aldo_14 #23 5 years ago

    Is Kristan Reed the boy with the arab strap(line)?

  • PlugMonkey #24 5 years ago

    but nobody whines about the price of Geometry Wars,

    I did.

    \/_\/

    It's a disease.

  • krudster #25 5 years ago

    Och you kill me!

  • krudster #26 5 years ago

    Scoring games isn't a science. Pac-Man/Ms Pac-Man gives me 8/10 joy, and I'll still be playing them in another 20 years. Centipede leaves me cold. I'm bored after a few goes and don't even feel that nostalgic about it. But, hey, the reskins and Throttle Monkey modes are quite nice, therefore a cosy 5/10.

    Personal opinions eh, who'd 'ave 'em?

  • Pulsar_t #27 5 years ago

    Belle&Sebastian FTW!!!

    X2

  • miiiguel #28 5 years ago

    I like the name. Funny fonetics..., not enough to play it for long though...

    I would like that XBLA games (demos) wouldn't register on one's games list, like a retail game. It pisses me of to have on my list games I don't want to have my name associated with. Not this case, but still..., for example Joust, I would like that to be removed. Manytimes I don't try the demos because of this. Kinda geeky, but I'm guilty of that.
    Edited by 1 at 10/05/07 @ 11:25

  • Royal Fool #29 5 years ago

    The only redeeming features of Centipede Millipede are:

    - The menu interface (quite good compared to all the other shitty ones that are so common with lazy XBLA ports... yes, I'm looking at you, Konami and Midway)

    The leaderboards, finally a system where you don't have to press buttons to flip between each filter and wait for the laggy system to update but can select one and apply it as you see fit

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #30 5 years ago

    "Scoring games isn't a science. Pac-Man/Ms Pac-Man gives me 8/10 joy, and I'll still be playing them in another 20 years. Centipede leaves me cold. I'm bored after a few goes and don't even feel that nostalgic about it. But, hey, the reskins and Throttle Monkey modes are quite nice, therefore a cosy 5/10.

    Personal opinions eh, who'd 'ave 'em? "

    Oh, sure. But the review barely mentions Centipede. It talks about the concept of re-releasing old arcade games at all (equally applicable to Pac-Man), it talks about the nostalgia value (equally applicable to Pac-Man), and it talks about modern-day enhancements (not applicable to Pac-Man, which had none).

    Nowhere in the review does it, y'know, attempt to say why Pac-Man is a better game than Centipede. If you'd said "I have fond memories of Pac-Man but not Centipede, so this is purely a personal-nostalgia rating", then fair enough. But this is a vastly superior package to the Pac-Man release in every measurable sense, so it either deserves to get a better mark, or an explanation of why you think Centipede is inherently an inferior game. Otherwise you don't need to review these XBLA titles at all. You just need a single-page feature listing your personal favourite 1980s coin-ops in order, which everyone can go and check whenever a new Live Arcade title comes out and work out the score for themselves, irrespective of what's actually been done with the XBLA release.
    Edited by 2 at 10/05/07 @ 12:52

  • krudster #31 5 years ago

    In other unrelated but equally irrelevant news, I prefer Prawn sandwiches to Ham and Cheese ones.

    Yawning is worth 5/10 on the fun factor, whereas a good fart is nearer 9/10.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #32 5 years ago

    Come on, then: let's have that list of Kristan's Favourite 1980s Coin-ops In Order. It'll save a lot of bother in the future.

    :D

  • krudster #33 5 years ago

    That'd be quite fun, actually, but wouldn't solve any arguments. Like any list, or any score you ever give anything, there's someone out there who reckons you're wrong.

    Hey ho.

    One to give some thought to, though, but like asking for someone's all-time top albums, you need a bit of time to formulate it...

  • Mr_Whacker #34 5 years ago

    "In other unrelated but equally irrelevant news, I prefer Prawn sandwiches to Ham and Cheese ones.

    Yawning is worth 5/10 on the fun factor, whereas a good fart is nearer 9/10. "

    Nice attitude. Or should I say 'I know you are but what am I?'

    Why should we take any notice of XBLA retro release reviews on EG if its ONLY based on your personal enjoyment?

    Pointless review and you get all defensive about it. Top skills.

  • LiamK #35 5 years ago

    I agree. Using "personal enjoyment" as a way of reviewing a videogame is clearly the height of mentalness.

    (In other news, I'm disturbed to find out that the editor of the site gets "ed" comments in his reviews. Is this a Tyler Durgen thing?)

  • bloke #36 5 years ago

    What I'm really - REALLY - looking forward to is 4 player Warlords playable across XBLA. And Tempest will be nice.

  • miiiguel #37 5 years ago

    In my yard, every and any rating of a ludic object/activity, is based on "personal enjoyment", at least that's the point I buy them for. I wont be "producing" any thing but that, after all.
    To ask reviewers do disregard that "lesser" factor is odd. Or one can ask: "make a list of the games you really hate, then review them".

  • smelly #38 5 years ago

    GOLLY GOSH NO! ANOTHER SHIT 360 GAME??

    Glad Im gonna sell mine now.

  • miiiguel #39 5 years ago

    I'm buying. Make a price.

  • smelly #40 5 years ago

    yip

    I like you manicminer.. you're one of the few people on here that makes sense.

    You a grown up yeah?

  • PlugMonkey #41 5 years ago

    How can a review be anything other than an analysis of the game based on the reviewer's personal preferences? You're talking about something entirely subjective. Or do you have some mathematical formula for calculating 'fun'? Check the listings on metacritic. You'll find everything from glowing praise to scathing criticism on virtually every book, game, film and album on there. You want to tell me who's right and who's wrong?

    What makes you think the reviews on Eurogamer are no more valid than the hammerings of a forum troll - I certainly don't feel my opinions are less valid than some journo's just because I'm not legitimised in print - the secret is to find someone with the same or similar tastes to you and go with that. That's why I read EG and not IGN.

    All a reviewer can give you is an opinion. Anything else would be guesswork anyway.

    "I really like this game, but you might not like it. 5/10 I guess."
    "I hate this game, but it might be right up your street. I guess I'll give that one 5/10 as well."

  • smelly #42 5 years ago

    Just read this thread.. there must be something up with the world.

    I find myself agreeing with stuart campbell..

    *shudders*

  • Stoatboy #43 5 years ago

    As I mentioned in the comments thread of the travesty of a Gyruss review, the problem is that EG has a scoring system that simply isn't suited to these games. By any sane interpretation of EG's scoring system none of the XBLA arcade classics should score below a 5, possibly even a 6. The review policy states that anything below this has to be bugged or flawed. None of these games are. They're perfectly playable, but whether you like playing them or not is down to personal preference. And yet several games have scored well below a 5 or 6.

    The problem seems to be that the reviewer here probably knows pretty much what they're getting before they review the game. If you never liked Centipede 20-odd years ago, are you going to change your mind now?

    Yet this is the kind of thing that doesn't happen for new games. If you don't like FPS games you won't be put on the Halo 3 review. If you don't like strategy games you don't get to review the next Civ or Total War. If you don't like Gyruss however, you just score it 3 out of 10.

    Even if a reviewer did get put on a current game that they hated though, they can't review it to personal taste alone. Look at the outcry EG's "low" Gears of War score provoked in the comments thread. Would a 3 based on personal preference have got published? Would it fuck! There's a public perception of what an acceptable score is for big name games, and if you're too far out of line you don't get taken seriously. Gears has easily got more bugs, glitches, and camera issues than all the XBLA classics put together, but there was absolutely no way in hell it would have scored below a 7 (regardless of the review policy).

    (I was going to suggest that these perceptions don't exist for classics, but then I got to thinking about Pacman and Frogger's relatively good reviews, and (obviously coincidental) high standing in the public perception as far as arcade classics go, compared to the kicking a lot of the less well-known (but IMO much better) games like Time Pilot and Gyruss got. Hmmm...)

    Regardless, I'm thinking a better approach would be to pick someone to either champion these games, or absolutely pillory them, and then leave the debate to the comments thread. That might at least get some passionate debate about the game going, rather than debate about the review. I'd much rather read a "Why I love Game X" or "Why I hate Game Y" and have a strong opinion either way, than think "Well, Kristan doesn't like this one then... ".

  • smelly #44 5 years ago

    You know, i dont know if a score is needed on live arcade games at all.

    I just need to read the words to decipher if its the kinda game that might interest me.

    Then i can download the demo and decide if i want to buy from that.

  • krudster #45 5 years ago

    The interweb would implode without scores to argue over.

  • miiiguel #46 5 years ago

    IMO, a review should allways reflect the pleasure it gives the reviewer , and explain why. Is it subjective ? of course it is! "Fun" isn't math, and that's a good thing isn't it ?
    It doesn't make sense (yet again to me), if it describes the game but technically.
    More, I'm kinda fond of reviewers that express their excitment (or disgust) in a passionate way. It reveals that they love what they're doing.
    All in all the rate should reflect the pleasure it gives, therefor I can't conceive the reviwer should disregard the pleasure he/she had.

    Stoatboy: your illustration of your point regarding this issue using Gears review is somewhat strange, as even if Gears has some bugs/glitches, it also delivers some other outstanding stuff. Should those be disregarded, because the host has allways the advantage while playing online ? me thinks, not.
    I know that some fellow gamers just don't like some genres, but there are ppl who enjoy playing any type of game. Myself for instance, I play any kinda game, as long as they're well made. I believe reviewers should have this hability as well.
    Other aspect with the retro titles: I think these games have an emotional issue attached, much more in sites like EG where the audience is 'mature', than other places (GS; IGN; etc.), but let's face it, a game, even if 20 years old can suck (idea-wise; conception-wise; etc.).

    "[...]reviews are no more valid than any random fantroll's keyboard hammerings on any forum on the internet?" (manic):
    Can't disagree more... . I tend to identify the reviewer and understand their points, and review myself in what they're saying, while with 'fantrolls' I can't care less. I also trust the "reviews" of my friends for the same reason, but than there's allways depth, and of course style.

    off-topic: can someone tell me how to put my Gamertag on my EG's profile ?
    Edited by 4 at 11/05/07 @ 12:17

  • Stoatboy #47 5 years ago

    miiiguel - my rather confused, post-pub point with the Gears comparison essentially is that if you got someone to review Gears who really didn't like 3rd person duck-and-cover shooters, and let them review it purely on how much they enjoyed it they could easily justify scoring it pretty low, but the review would never get published, because it would clash with every other review out there, even though it was an honest personal opinion. The reviewer would have to try and assess it from the POV of someone who did like that type of game, or it would be written by somebody else.

    Yet it seems it's OK to get someone to review Gyruss - who already knows they don't like Gyruss - and give it an absolute kicking based entirely on how much they enjoyed it, in a review that ignores the site's own scoring system.


    I guess my point is that I still haven't finished Gears because I can't summon up the chutzpah to load it up again to try to beat one of the game's horrible boss encounters, but I've been playing Gyruss on and off for the best part of 25 years, and I got a new highscore last night, breaking into the top 300 on the leaderboard (it's still not a particularly good score, sadly). Therefore, Gyruss > Gears ;)

    Back on topic, Centipede and Millipede are rather spiffy too.

  • ChromeMud #48 5 years ago

    Played this,yeeeeurgh!Those particle effect's don't save this garbage.
    Hated it back in the 'Commodore VIC20 16k RAM' days.
    I'd rather play with a calculator.