Atari v Commodore

[atariksi]

No, the fact IS that Rockford is here just to tease us Atarians and come with things we all already know. Sure C64 has more hardware sprites and it is easier to make 2D scrolling games, but still A8 can do similar or better things. We rather don't go beyond "games" department.

 

On many occasions when new fine A8 game or demo product comes out to the public, many times the only argument C64 fanboys could manage to produce is something like that: oh, it can be done on C64 either... oh, how hard it is to start doing something on A8... oh in sploh...

C64 doesn't have more hw sprites, it has 8 like A8. And they are bigger, better, more flexible and easier to multiplex. So no, in the case of sprite based stuff the A8 cannot do similar or better things.

 

Sorry, you messed up. C64 sprites are shorter, cover less area, more difficult to multiplex, and not necessarily better in all cases.

 

Nor does one strength outdo many many other strengths on A8. If people targetted A8's strengths in a game, it would be impossible to port to C64. Just because you have wider sprites which makes it difficult to port to A8, doesn't make it superior. I bet if you made the 24*21 sprites move it high speed during a frame, they would be hard to port to Amiga.

[atariksi]

Someone just lives in their own little world of "I'm never wrong" don't they. I presume it has nice soft walls.

 

 

Pete

 

If you can't address the point, no need to make some speculative assertion.

 

Hmm, telling me what to do now as well as what I'm thinking without asking

 

I've already stated that I'm not going to "argue" over these points any more because there is no way you will ever admit you are wrong. Twisting the meanings of your posts to suit your argument over and over, leaving out important facts from one post to another. Never admitting your wrong when it's proved you are but instead changing track entirely so hopefully people will forget about it. It's not worth it to waste my time on you. I suppose the plan was to get me banned like Oswald and then there would be one less threat against you.

 

 

Pete

 

Speculations speculations. Where are the facts? Point to the post where you PROVED I am wrong. I can say the samething right back to you but I don't take part in these foolish childish games or straw-man arguments. You have twisted mind if you think I twisted a simple point-- your generalization is misleading.

[PeteD]

Someone just lives in their own little world of "I'm never wrong" don't they. I presume it has nice soft walls.

 

 

Pete

 

If you can't address the point, no need to make some speculative assertion.

 

Hmm, telling me what to do now as well as what I'm thinking without asking

 

I've already stated that I'm not going to "argue" over these points any more because there is no way you will ever admit you are wrong. Twisting the meanings of your posts to suit your argument over and over, leaving out important facts from one post to another. Never admitting your wrong when it's proved you are but instead changing track entirely so hopefully people will forget about it. It's not worth it to waste my time on you. I suppose the plan was to get me banned like Oswald and then there would be one less threat against you.

 

 

Pete

 

Speculations speculations. Where are the facts? Point to the post where you PROVED I am wrong. I can say the samething right back to you but I don't take part in these foolish childish games or straw-man arguments. You have twisted mind if you think I twisted a simple point-- your generalization is misleading.

 

lol, a certain c64 scener warned me this would be coming. You know where they are but you'll never admit to it so why should I waste my time. I've said what I want to to you over the past few days. I don't like your attitude, I don't respect you because of that, I care nothing about what you think of me but you ARE full of it and you damn well know it.

 

 

Pete

[atariksi]

Someone just lives in their own little world of "I'm never wrong" don't they. I presume it has nice soft walls.

 

 

Pete

 

If you can't address the point, no need to make some speculative assertion.

 

Hmm, telling me what to do now as well as what I'm thinking without asking

 

I've already stated that I'm not going to "argue" over these points any more because there is no way you will ever admit you are wrong. Twisting the meanings of your posts to suit your argument over and over, leaving out important facts from one post to another. Never admitting your wrong when it's proved you are but instead changing track entirely so hopefully people will forget about it. It's not worth it to waste my time on you. I suppose the plan was to get me banned like Oswald and then there would be one less threat against you.

 

 

Pete

 

Speculations speculations. Where are the facts? Point to the post where you PROVED I am wrong. I can say the samething right back to you but I don't take part in these foolish childish games or straw-man arguments. You have twisted mind if you think I twisted a simple point-- your generalization is misleading.

 

lol, a certain c64 scener warned me this would be coming. You know where they are but you'll never admit to it so why should I waste my time. I've said what I want to to you over the past few days. I don't like your attitude, I don't respect you because of that, I care nothing about what you think of me but you ARE full of it and you damn well know it.

 

 

Pete

 

No, I don't know what the hell you are talking about. You screwed up and think I made a mistake. That's all folks. You already stated previously that you were starting a different topic for your game needs but looks like you couldn't resist yourself. I don't care about what other mental speculators told you. I only go by facts not by what you think or speculate.

[PeteD]

Wrong again. If nothing else comes to mind you implied that I wouldn't admit to the kb and joystick having problems. If you were honest you'd admit that. It was not mentioned anywhere I've ever read on this forum and suddenly you bring it out as a direct reply to me. It was directed at me.

 

 

eg

 

You want to discuss problems (you started this), then don't deny your kb/joystick interference problems or any others that get mentioned. Okay, so now you want to do fault-finding-- okay explain the normal res/PMGs border problem so we can discuss that.

 

 

And that's not aimed at me? as a direct post to me? THAT is what has pissed me off today that when I said "hold on, you can't just presume that" instead of just saying ok I can't you go off on a tirade and an attack of trying to change your meaning to get out of admitting that timers interrupt pokey music. Which I'd already agreed to posssssts before didn't mean you couldn't have music.

 

 

 

Pete

[Bryan]

C64 certainly beat Atari in price, but can't accept putting up same 16 colors many times to be an advantage over a bigger palette and GTIA modes with resolution enhancement or GPRIOR mode 0, but then again perhaps all people go by is what got used rather than what a system can do.

Well, you're very much a "glass-half-full" guy when it comes to Atari's capabilities. I love the Atari, but I completely understand why programmers who get paid to finish the job would have an easier time converting most games to the 64. It wasn't economically feasible to hire 1337 hAx0rz to get every ounce of performance out of the A8. Of course, today we have programmers who take the time.

Edited September 6, 2009 by Bryan

[PeteD]

Another example, when I had only mentioned to someone else that the "borders" didn't mask PMGs so that they were kind of useless for that purpose (something that the C64 ones do) and I'd just go to overscan and let the TV handle it, you have to join in and then this crap starts....

 

"I don't see the problem. Background is the lowest priority consistently-- it's not a bug. You only would use overscan for avoiding border color, but people have found better uses for it. Overscan is useful (perhaps not for you)."

 

 

So you repeat what I've already said (so I wasn't wrong) then imply that I'm saying it's a bug when I never said that.

 

 

 

Far too many times you twist what people say, twist your own meanings from one post to the next.

 

 

Pete

[atariksi]

Wrong again. If nothing else comes to mind you implied that I wouldn't admit to the kb and joystick having problems. If you were honest you'd admit that. It was not mentioned anywhere I've ever read on this forum and suddenly you bring it out as a direct reply to me. It was directed at me.

 

 

eg

 

You want to discuss problems (you started this), then don't deny your kb/joystick interference problems or any others that get mentioned. Okay, so now you want to do fault-finding-- okay explain the normal res/PMGs border problem so we can discuss that.

 

 

And that's not aimed at me? as a direct post to me? THAT is what has pissed me off today that when I said "hold on, you can't just presume that" instead of just saying ok I can't you go off on a tirade and an attack of trying to change your meaning to get out of admitting that timers interrupt pokey music. Which I'd already agreed to posssssts before didn't mean you couldn't have music.

 

 

 

Pete

 

And you didn't care to think why in the middle of a heated debate of "timers affected POKEY music" that I would suddenly start speaking of an unrelated topic of KB/joystick interference??? I used it as an analogy to explain reuseability of resources not as a SEPARATE point. Whether you accept the kb/joystick interference was only relevant to you understanding the analogy. I am not trying to twist myself out of it that's why I said-- if you don't want to accept the analogy-- then leave it alone.

[atariksi]

Another example, when I had only mentioned to someone else that the "borders" didn't mask PMGs so that they were kind of useless for that purpose (something that the C64 ones do) and I'd just go to overscan and let the TV handle it, you have to join in and then this crap starts....

 

"I don't see the problem. Background is the lowest priority consistently-- it's not a bug. You only would use overscan for avoiding border color, but people have found better uses for it. Overscan is useful (perhaps not for you)."

 

 

So you repeat what I've already said (so I wasn't wrong) then imply that I'm saying it's a bug when I never said that.

 

 

 

Far too many times you twist what people say, twist your own meanings from one post to the next.

 

 

Pete

 

I did answer that already. Read the first line: "I don't see the problem." If it's something problematic or a bug, it's in the same area for me. I think this came much later to you getting pissed off.

[atariksi]

...

It was not mentioned anywhere I've ever read on this forum and suddenly you bring it out as a direct reply to me. It was directed at me.

...

 

 

The KB/Joystick issue is mentioned in this thread-- but perhaps too much to go back and read.

[PeteD]

Wrong again. If nothing else comes to mind you implied that I wouldn't admit to the kb and joystick having problems. If you were honest you'd admit that. It was not mentioned anywhere I've ever read on this forum and suddenly you bring it out as a direct reply to me. It was directed at me.

 

 

eg

 

You want to discuss problems (you started this), then don't deny your kb/joystick interference problems or any others that get mentioned. Okay, so now you want to do fault-finding-- okay explain the normal res/PMGs border problem so we can discuss that.

 

 

And that's not aimed at me? as a direct post to me? THAT is what has pissed me off today that when I said "hold on, you can't just presume that" instead of just saying ok I can't you go off on a tirade and an attack of trying to change your meaning to get out of admitting that timers interrupt pokey music. Which I'd already agreed to posssssts before didn't mean you couldn't have music.

 

 

 

Pete

 

And you didn't care to think why in the middle of a heated debate of "timers affected POKEY music" that I would suddenly start speaking of an unrelated topic of KB/joystick interference??? I used it as an analogy to explain reuseability of resources not as a SEPARATE point. Whether you accept the kb/joystick interference was only relevant to you understanding the analogy. I am not trying to twist myself out of it that's why I said-- if you don't want to accept the analogy-- then leave it alone.

 

Another example of the same presumption from you.

 

 

"If you think it's fine for you to say that timers affect music (in general) then you should also accept a perfectly valid statement that joystick input is erroneous on C64 due to keyboard interference or vice versa."

 

 

I cared very much to think why. Out of the blue you come up with some supposed analogy, aim it at me which is blatant from the quote I posted earlier "then don't deny" and I even said, hold on you cant presume I wouldn't agree to that. From then on your replies just became nonsense, you refused to admit you'd implied I wouldn't agree that kb/joystick was along the same lines as the timer/pokey problem and try ever escape route possible down to kicking the whole thing off again tonight and making me waste even more time on you.

 

 

Pete

[PeteD]

...

It was not mentioned anywhere I've ever read on this forum and suddenly you bring it out as a direct reply to me. It was directed at me.

...

 

 

The KB/Joystick issue is mentioned in this thread-- but perhaps too much to go back and read.

 

So you presume I've read it? and commented on it somewhere maybe and dissagreed with it?

 

Pete

[emkay]

 

Well, you're very much a "glass-half-full" guy when it comes to Atari's capabilities. I love the Atari, but I completely understand why programmers who get paid to finish the job would have an easier time converting most games to the 64. It wasn't economically feasible to hire 1337 hAx0rz to get every ounce of performance out of the A8. Of course, today we have programmers who take the time.

 

Depends on "what was done" ...

2D games in 320x200 with 16 colours ist something we "could" approach somehow.

But, really, some effort with 3D really would have been reached on the A8, as some game like "Katakis" or "Turrican" was reached on the C64.

The Atari was done for creating fullscreen stuff. But, coders tried to chase C64 in some case. They could have done some "pre Wolfenstein 3D" with the same cost of development instead.

As you might have seen already. Everyone today prefers a worse looking 3D game and even the finest 2D game gets mediocre votes.

As I wrote many times before:

 

The fact that the C64 broke with the "rule" of hardware growth, and the success on the market, resulted in a halt for 3D development. 3D was good even from 1979 to 1982 and started again after 1992. This is exactly the lifespan of the C64.

Without the success of the C64 in that time, and the given hardware of the A8, we could have seen serious 3D games on the A8 before 1985.

Edited September 6, 2009 by emkay

[atariksi]

Wrong again. If nothing else comes to mind you implied that I wouldn't admit to the kb and joystick having problems. If you were honest you'd admit that. It was not mentioned anywhere I've ever read on this forum and suddenly you bring it out as a direct reply to me. It was directed at me.

 

 

eg

 

You want to discuss problems (you started this), then don't deny your kb/joystick interference problems or any others that get mentioned. Okay, so now you want to do fault-finding-- okay explain the normal res/PMGs border problem so we can discuss that.

 

 

And that's not aimed at me? as a direct post to me? THAT is what has pissed me off today that when I said "hold on, you can't just presume that" instead of just saying ok I can't you go off on a tirade and an attack of trying to change your meaning to get out of admitting that timers interrupt pokey music. Which I'd already agreed to posssssts before didn't mean you couldn't have music.

 

 

 

Pete

 

And you didn't care to think why in the middle of a heated debate of "timers affected POKEY music" that I would suddenly start speaking of an unrelated topic of KB/joystick interference??? I used it as an analogy to explain reuseability of resources not as a SEPARATE point. Whether you accept the kb/joystick interference was only relevant to you understanding the analogy. I am not trying to twist myself out of it that's why I said-- if you don't want to accept the analogy-- then leave it alone.

 

Another example of the same presumption from you.

 

 

"If you think it's fine for you to say that timers affect music (in general) then you should also accept a perfectly valid statement that joystick input is erroneous on C64 due to keyboard interference or vice versa."

 

 

I cared very much to think why. Out of the blue you come up with some supposed analogy, aim it at me which is blatant from the quote I posted earlier "then don't deny" and I even said, hold on you cant presume I wouldn't agree to that. From then on your replies just became nonsense, you refused to admit you'd implied I wouldn't agree that kb/joystick was along the same lines as the timer/pokey problem and try ever escape route possible down to kicking the whole thing off again tonight and making me waste even more time on you.

 

 

Pete

 

"Then don't deny" meaning you should accept the analogy (as related to POKEY argument) not that you are denying accepting kb/joystick problem since we never discussed it before.

[atariksi]

...

It was not mentioned anywhere I've ever read on this forum and suddenly you bring it out as a direct reply to me. It was directed at me.

...

 

 

The KB/Joystick issue is mentioned in this thread-- but perhaps too much to go back and read.

 

So you presume I've read it? and commented on it somewhere maybe and dissagreed with it?

 

Pete

 

We never discussed it. It was discussed before you popped in from hyperspace.

[PeteD]

Wrong again. If nothing else comes to mind you implied that I wouldn't admit to the kb and joystick having problems. If you were honest you'd admit that. It was not mentioned anywhere I've ever read on this forum and suddenly you bring it out as a direct reply to me. It was directed at me.

 

 

eg

 

You want to discuss problems (you started this), then don't deny your kb/joystick interference problems or any others that get mentioned. Okay, so now you want to do fault-finding-- okay explain the normal res/PMGs border problem so we can discuss that.

 

 

And that's not aimed at me? as a direct post to me? THAT is what has pissed me off today that when I said "hold on, you can't just presume that" instead of just saying ok I can't you go off on a tirade and an attack of trying to change your meaning to get out of admitting that timers interrupt pokey music. Which I'd already agreed to posssssts before didn't mean you couldn't have music.

 

 

 

Pete

 

And you didn't care to think why in the middle of a heated debate of "timers affected POKEY music" that I would suddenly start speaking of an unrelated topic of KB/joystick interference??? I used it as an analogy to explain reuseability of resources not as a SEPARATE point. Whether you accept the kb/joystick interference was only relevant to you understanding the analogy. I am not trying to twist myself out of it that's why I said-- if you don't want to accept the analogy-- then leave it alone.

 

Another example of the same presumption from you.

 

 

"If you think it's fine for you to say that timers affect music (in general) then you should also accept a perfectly valid statement that joystick input is erroneous on C64 due to keyboard interference or vice versa."

 

 

I cared very much to think why. Out of the blue you come up with some supposed analogy, aim it at me which is blatant from the quote I posted earlier "then don't deny" and I even said, hold on you cant presume I wouldn't agree to that. From then on your replies just became nonsense, you refused to admit you'd implied I wouldn't agree that kb/joystick was along the same lines as the timer/pokey problem and try ever escape route possible down to kicking the whole thing off again tonight and making me waste even more time on you.

 

 

Pete

 

"Then don't deny" meaning you should accept the analogy (as related to POKEY argument) not that you are denying accepting kb/joystick problem since we never discussed it before.

 

Now you're trying to take it out of context. Go back and read it all or even my last few posts. "then don't deny" can in no way mean I should accept an analogy, that obviously wasn't your meaning at the time, if it was you'd have said so when I asked about it.

 

 

I'll post your other message once again.

 

"If you think it's fine for you to say that timers affect music (in general) then you should also accept a perfectly valid statement that joystick input is erroneous on C64 due to keyboard interference or vice versa."

 

You just can't expect me to believe either of your 2 similar posts I've quoted weren't directed at me as if I've ever disagreed to it at some point.

 

 

Pete

[PeteD]

...

It was not mentioned anywhere I've ever read on this forum and suddenly you bring it out as a direct reply to me. It was directed at me.

...

 

 

The KB/Joystick issue is mentioned in this thread-- but perhaps too much to go back and read.

 

So you presume I've read it? and commented on it somewhere maybe and dissagreed with it?

 

Pete

 

We never discussed it. It was discussed before you popped in from hyperspace.

 

Now you're getting there. Well done.

 

 

Pete

[dwhyte]

[PeteD]

No, the fact IS that Rockford is here just to tease us Atarians and come with things we all already know. Sure C64 has more hardware sprites and it is easier to make 2D scrolling games, but still A8 can do similar or better things. We rather don't go beyond "games" department.

 

On many occasions when new fine A8 game or demo product comes out to the public, many times the only argument C64 fanboys could manage to produce is something like that: oh, it can be done on C64 either... oh, how hard it is to start doing something on A8... oh in sploh...

C64 doesn't have more hw sprites, it has 8 like A8. And they are bigger, better, more flexible and easier to multiplex. So no, in the case of sprite based stuff the A8 cannot do similar or better things.

 

Sorry, you messed up. C64 sprites are shorter, cover less area, more difficult to multiplex, and not necessarily better in all cases.

 

Nor does one strength outdo many many other strengths on A8. If people targetted A8's strengths in a game, it would be impossible to port to C64. Just because you have wider sprites which makes it difficult to port to A8, doesn't make it superior. I bet if you made the 24*21 sprites move it high speed during a frame, they would be hard to port to Amiga.

 

Not wanting to get emroiled in yet another argument but saying they're more difficult to multiplex isn't necessarily true.

 

I'll certainly agree that just because the A8 doesn't have the, well, I'll say "same" sprite hardware as the C64 doesn't mean the A8 is a worse machine. A8 being impossible to port to C64? A generalisation, something I thought wasn't allowed around here but yes, something like NRVs Project is "impossible" in as far as C64 doesn't have the colours or the CPU to handle it as well as the A8 can but it can do a reasonable job (mood). Other games that are more CPU intensive (Head over Heels for example) are harder to port because if they're done using the same technique the C64 one will be slower BUT there are different ways to do it as shown in Chimera. If I wasn't such a procrastinator and also had so many things to do I'd have a demo of an isometric game much more colourful and complex than HoH that runs on C64 in 1 frame. Demo code is 1/2 written, logic is worked out, tests have been done. No graphics yet and not all bolted together. That's for after Fist. I'll also be doing it on A8 but I haven't worked out yet if it'll keep the speed AND colours I can do on the C64 but as it's my game design and code there's no reason why not and that's certianlly what I'm aiming for.

 

Another colour win for the A8 is the PMG logical OR with background as I described in an earlier post about maybe someone with the skill doing some backgrounds for an Exploding Fist A8 "special" I want to do after the "vanilla" port using 23 colours in the area of the background the players don't cross. Although does 23 colours instead of 16 make it that much better? and it's VERY hard to use not only from a design point but from a utilisation apart from static screens and the few games that would really benefit from it without causing some poor coder or artist to tear their hair out (Tetris, as someone mentioned). But still, impossible on C64.

 

24x21 sprites moving at high speed (don't know what difference speed makes but I'm sure I'll be told) hard to port to amiga? Another assumption and as an ex amiga coder I'd say a wrong one. ST, harder. Oh wait, that's an Atari machine (runs for cover)

 

C64 sprites may be shorter but they're free to move in Y. You have to move data but yours are taller so no interrupts are needed to repeat them. Multiplexing as far as repeating the sprites down the screen on c64 doesn't take much cpu. To multiplex (as in free moving objects) A8 sprites CAN be harder depending on the screen mode (DLIs per scanline or every 8?) or timers (I'd go for timers if using a char screen mode) but you've got the overhead of changing the X pos AND stuffing data to change Y AND you can't have the width of coverage of multicolour sprites on 1 scanline.

 

As far as generally not covering the same area. Width wise A8s can cover the equivalent of a 320 hires wide screen (so no good for covering the entire displayable area), C64s 384 pixels. C64s are higher res, more colours. Not better in all cases? Quite probably even I can think of some cases where A8 ones would be better. Maybe an overlay of a parallax effect that requires a sprite to be in front of and as tall as the whole screen (someone posted a link to a java game a few pages back that uses that effect to add more depth). Still possible on C64 but takes the extra cpu for the raster interrupts and lda sta needed to change the Y pos. Of course the A8 one would have to be mono and/or limited to 8 pixels (ok 16 as far as a c64er sees it) else that's 2 Players at least gone. It's kind of hard to think of one of these actually but I won't say there aren't some uses that the C64 can do as easily.

 

Once again this isn't an argument, it's facts. I always try to give an unbiased view no matter how some people read my posts and I only get truly argumentative when people attack for no reason. I don't like when C64 people with some screenshots appear and say the A8 is crap because of these.. but unless you won't allow that, surely it's their right to at least post them and then you just chill out and ignore it. It might prove the game is worse on A8 but not the machine itself, in those cases it's just poor implementation. If someone appears and posts some pics and then proves logically that the A8 couldn't even approach doing that game, fair enough. You've only got to go back to when I first joined this site to see I'll defend the A8 sometimes even more than the Atarians when I think someone is talking out their arse. BUT I also don't like when assumptions are made about the C64 or facts are ignored and I'll defend that too and NOT beacuse I'm a C64er/fanboy/troll or anything else, I just like to see the full facts about a subject disclosed when someone is arguing about this or that is better.

 

All in all, as I keep saying there are some VERY defensive people on this forum who will jump down the throat of anyone even if they're trying to help just because they have a slightly different viewpoint. Have a discussion by all means, if you make a mistake, admit it, I will and have even in the last day or so. I suppose I'm living in make believe land that this will ever happen and as I think dwhyte said if you went to lemon or somewhere and said, "look, Rescue on Fractalus is better on A8" you'd no doubt be run out of town by 90% of the people on there. There are however people there as well who will agree.

 

 

Sorry about the long post and some of the info maybe should be moved from one paragraph to another to read better, but it is 3:15 in the morning

 

 

 

Pete

[PeteD]

 

lol

 

And good choice, I loathe that guy who plays the atari in your pic. I'm always relieved when the monsters eat him

 

 

 

Pete

[dwhyte]

 

lol

 

And good choice, I loathe that guy who plays the atari in your pic. I'm always relieved when the monsters eat him

 

 

 

Pete

 

 

Glad you liked it...

 

EDIT: For all our UK friends...

 

Edited September 7, 2009 by dwhyte

[oky2000]

Ultimately I would hope it's a quest to find the best features of each standard machine models sold at the time (so no SCPU/REU C64s or VBXE or 320kb A8s!), neither machine is perfect ALL 8bit (and most 16bit) home computers are a massive compromise. Features can be anything from the quality of the I/O routines (inc tape as well as disk turbos in software only so using standard hardware)

 

RAM is no option to disqualify.It's just like to say "C64 users is not allowed to use trackloaders" just because the A8 does not take that much benefit by this.

All machines, also C64, were created to use RAM/ROM expansions. C64 freaks tend to deny RAM expansions, because the C64 doesn't take much benefit by this...

 

No the reason I exclude it is because they're not even simple RAM cartridges and NEVER existed to purchase in the lifetime of the machine. They are full on mini electronics projects like installing 1mb upgrades inside an original ST (not STF/STFM/STE) requiring the case to be opened usually. IF it was a simple cartridge and IF it was available at the time of sale of any A8 fine but it is neither unlike the Commodore branded 256/512kb cartridge expansions. If you show me a 1980s sale receipt for a 520XE or 320XE I am happy to accept these 320/512kb machines

[emkay]

 

Hm....

An ATARI is a lies spreading Apple guy?

[oky2000]

Existing games as an average don't always give a true picture, look at how absolutely pathetic most arcade conversions of Amiga games are, and yet in the hands of a talented coder the games can be as good as Sharp x68000 or Neo Geo games. Only takes a handful of examples of each machine being pushed to it's limits to see some potential (again the Amiga being the perfect example comparing Lotus Turbo Challenge II and Outrun or Chase HQ games of what is and what should have been!)

 

What are you talking about, exactly? I want to see an X68000 quality game on my old AMIGA 2000

 

Well ok compare the sprite scaling sega-style graphics of the Lotus II racing game on Amiga with anything on the Neo-Geo/x68000/Genesis/SNES and you get the idea. For it's time this game wipes the floor with almost any game on any 16 bit system for speed and smoothness of updating the moving objects. Now compare that to Outrun on the Amiga....totally different quality and you wouldn't think it was running on the same machine.

 

Plenty of original (not arcade conversion) games on the Amiga show it to be a formidable machine but you wouldn't know it looking at the 'official' arcade conversions, take all the King of Fighters Neo-Geo games and compare it to the Fightin' Spirit game engine on Amiga ditto with SF2 on the SNES/Genesis and compare them to Shadow Fighter game engine on Amiga.

 

Space Harrier 1 is a good exception but still there is no reason it couldn't have been pretty much identical to the Sharp x68000 version despite the machines being 4 years apart.

[emkay]

No the reason I exclude it is because they're not even simple RAM cartridges and NEVER existed to purchase in the lifetime of the machine. They are full on mini electronics projects like installing 1mb upgrades inside an original ST (not STF/STFM/STE) requiring the case to be opened usually. IF it was a simple cartridge and IF it was available at the time of sale of any A8 fine but it is neither unlike the Commodore branded 256/512kb cartridge expansions. If you show me a 1980s sale receipt for a 520XE or 320XE I am happy to accept these 320/512kb machines

 

why do C64 gyus sometimes defend nonsense? I never have heard of a "64K" era.It was always named "8-Bit" era. RAM size never was limited to 64K, except it was expensive. It was more expensive in the time when the A8 was developed, and it was less expensive in the time when the C64 was developed.

 

If you buy a PC, it is not called a Hardware change when adding some RAM.

Soldering, plugging.... is the difference. If people wanted to buy an AMIGA with the option for a big RAM expansion, they bought an A2000. If people wanted to buy a cheaper machine, they had to solder, if they wanted more than 1MB of RAM in their A500.

And so on....

And , if people bought an A8, they bought the option for plugging big RAM into the cartridge and/or the Parallel Bus.

 

Alke if RAM or ROM was built into the expansion. It was there in the 80s.

It's only the lacking of "interrest", caused by not seeing a huge mountain of money at the end of the tunnel, they preferred to create programs on the C64 with it's simpler to use hardware features, so the "possible" features were not added to the A8 programs.

 

Something like a 16 colour "Rescue on Fractalus" or "Koronis Rift" or "The Eidolon" with full animated objects and realtime monitoring, could have been done without the loss of any framerate. Digi speech not to forget.

 

Having them only available as a cartridge, back in those days, was even a very good copy protection. And people would have bought it..... also before the C64 arrived