Favourite Amiga shmup?

[Shatterhand]

I am not dismissing it, but it was annoying. Don't get me wrong I am glad we got games like Astro Marine Corps, yet I can't help but think we deserved a much better port of Double Dragon than that shitty Spectrum port, for example. Topo Soft was the only european "mainly spectrum developer" that actually bothered to do something decent with the MSX from time to time (Colt 36, Temptations). Opera Soft also did a decent port job with Goody, making the game more colorful and even released an MSX 2 version with much better graphics.

The MSX 1 version of Outrun by U.S.Gold had a RED car instead of a "transparent" car like the Spectrum version, other than that it was identical. Just adding details like that would already be nice, instead of the direct "I can 't see what the fuck is going on" spectrum port we usually got.

The Amstrad CPC got decent ports, why MSX users had to cope with either "2 colors" or "Sprites are transparent so they change colors according to the background" ports? Just making the sprites solid would make a lot of them a lot more playable.

Europeans just had no idea of how to code for the MSX I believe. Konami games on MSX were great, but the only game they asked their european counterpart to code, we got that HORRIBLE Green Beret port....




I never saw an Atari ST running, so I couldn't tell the difference on the 3D games (But they were probably faster indeed, as you say)...but I saw Bionic Commando on Amiga, ported direct from Atari ST, and I wanted to puke.

[bcass]

The only reason why European developers didn't push the MSX is because the markets for all the other 8-bit home computers were significantly larger (in Europe). Also, the MSX hardware is identical to the Spectrum hardware except for the additional video chip, so Spectrum ports were very quick/easy to do.

[Shatterhand]

Yeah, I know that. But I wonder, if the european developers actually cared to make proper games for the MSX, maybe its market would be bigger?

I read an article with one of the guys from Topo Soft, that they were really interested in making MSX exclusive games (And they've made 3 of them, Colt 36, Temptations and Ale Hop), and also make better ports for the system, but their mother company (Erbe Software) told them to not waste time with specific hardware development, and just do quick ports.... which, according to this guy, he never understood as their 3 MSX exclusive games sold more than most of their Spectrum games at time.

[Twiddle]

msx could have been a treasure trove for roguelikes

[mcgeezer]

Wings of Death is better on Amiga. Don't forget: Amiga = 32 colors, Atari ST = 16 colors. Amiga also has MUCH better sound capabilities than ST. The music and sound effects sound clearer, and because Amiga has more sound channels, the music doesn't break off when an enemy explodes.

On the other hand, a lot of Amiga games were Atari ST ports (especially a lot of the earlier games). The concept that the Amiga had better sound quality is a matter of taste. The Amiga audio hardware wasn't a PSG (Programmable Sound Generator) - it was just a device for playing sound samples (instrument samples). A lot of Amiga music has dated badly, because of the low sample quality of the inststruments and the strange forced wide-pan stereo separation used in the soundtracks. There's some good stuff too, but let's not lose sight of the pros and cons of each platform. The bog standard ST had a faster CPU too which enabled the playback of Amiga style MODs.

I had an Atari ST and then an Amiga and I done alot of 68000 assembler on both systems during the cracking days. In my opinion it was very rare to see a bad port of an ST game to the Amiga, generally I think it was always down to laziness as the Amiga was superior in almost everyway to the ST, the laziness probably came in the handling of the video hardware whereby the machines operate differently - the ST video operates in 16 bit chunk modes to build up pixels and the Amiga operates in bitplanes. Had the programmers spent a bit of time exploring the Amiga blitter they'd have been able to surpass the ST in vectors no problem.

I always remeber being at the computer club and the Amiga owners loading up the intro to Blood Money, the ST owners were well pissed off and had to start saving their cash. They were really really pissed off the week after when the Amiga owners loaded up Shadow of the Beast, that's when the argument was won at the time that an Amiga is superior to an ST.


Just my recolection though!

[bcass]

I'm boggled as to how the Blitter would help the Amiga to calculate vectors. I know it can be used for fast line drawing, but in 3D?

I'm an Amiga man myself, but even I can admit that most of those glossy games, despite looking and sounding great, were actually diabolical. That was a bad patch for gaming.

[mcgeezer]

I'm boggled as to how the Blitter would help the Amiga to calculate vectors. I know it can be used for fast line drawing, but in 3D?

I'm an Amiga man myself, but even I can admit that most of those glossy games, despite looking and sounding great, were actually diabolical. That was a bad patch for gaming.

Sorry, that's what I meant - fast line drawing and area fills if I remember the blitter hardware correctly. It suited bitplane video better as you could set modulo, source and destination address and tell it copy memory around quick (well quicker than the cpu could anyway).

[MJR]

Heh, its heartwarming to still read ST vs. Amiga debates -at year 2007!
Keep going at it, guys. you made my day No, really!

[yojo!]

The ST could not even dream of doing things like that: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pI0Xi_-A2oE

[bcass]

That's somewhat stating the obvious. The discussion here isn't about the Amigas superior bitmap handling. Besides, I'm pretty sure the STE (basically an ST with a Blitter) could quite easily handle it.

[Ceph]

The ST could not even dream of doing things like that: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pI0Xi_-A2oE

Cool! All the kanji are mirrored, though.

Here's another one that ST could never do:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5kuYfTCGLg

[mcgeezer]

That's somewhat stating the obvious. The discussion here isn't about the Amigas superior bitmap handling. Besides, I'm pretty sure the STE (basically an ST with a Blitter) could quite easily handle it.

What's somewhat stating the obvious? We know the discussion is not about the Amigas bitmap handling, it's a disussion about why some Amiga/ST ports of games and vice versa were a bag of shit.

The STE was a number of years too late, had Atari got their shit together they'd have stuck a blitter in there to start with and maybe ST owners would have enjoyed a better gaming experience.

Id doubt even an STE could not cope with those Amiga demos such as State of the Art and Nine Fingers.

[bcass]

What's somewhat stating the obvious?

I was referring to the post directly above mine (the post by yojo!). Bringing up demos is scraping the barrel somewhat . The plain fact of the matter is that a hell of a lot of Amiga games were ST ports, and even a lot of the better Amiga stuff had an ST version.

[Turrican]

What's somewhat stating the obvious?

I was referring to the post directly above mine (the post by yojo!). Bringing up demos is scraping the barrel somewhat . The plain fact of the matter is that a hell of a lot of Amiga games were ST ports, and even a lot of the better Amiga stuff had an ST version.

Which is obvious - these 16bit machines didn't gain sale momentum until '90s. Now imagine Xbox 360 and PS3 costing $1500 each and having an installed base of fifty people in the world. Do you really think programmers would "exploit the features" of the respective hardware?

[neorichieb1971]

I'd love to see the Coyote's revenge demo and the Lemmings demo again

Most Amiga stuff was not that good as far as games go. Stunt car racer, Lotus Esprit challenge 2 and that bomberman clone were the best games on it. I did like Alien breed.. but for the most part I preferred the C64 era.

[bcass]

What's somewhat stating the obvious?

I was referring to the post directly above mine (the post by yojo!). Bringing up demos is scraping the barrel somewhat . The plain fact of the matter is that a hell of a lot of Amiga games were ST ports, and even a lot of the better Amiga stuff had an ST version.

Which is obvious - these 16bit machines didn't gain sale momentum until '90s. Now imagine Xbox 360 and PS3 costing $1500 each and having an installed base of fifty people in the world. Do you really think programmers would "exploit the features" of the respective hardware?

What, you mean like the PS3

[bcass]

that bomberman clone

It wasn't a clone, it was officially licensed IIRC.

[Fenrir]

I had an Atari ST and then an Amiga and I done alot of 68000 assembler on both systems during the cracking days. In my opinion it was very rare to see a bad port of an ST game to the Amiga

Freakin' Dragon's Lair. Can't believe it was so good on the ST and so dull on the amy. The only moment of my life when I had some envy for that friend of mine who owned a ST.
Wouldn't like to be in HIS place tho for the other 99.999999999% of the games

[bcass]

Oids as well. The was a great little ST shmup (yes, I know most you you won't class it as a shmup, but I do). Probably the best of all the gravity-shmups.

[Turrican]

I was referring to the post directly above mine (the post by yojo!). Bringing up demos is scraping the barrel somewhat . The plain fact of the matter is that a hell of a lot of Amiga games were ST ports, and even a lot of the better Amiga stuff had an ST version.

Which is obvious - these 16bit machines didn't gain sale momentum until '90s. Now imagine Xbox 360 and PS3 costing $1500 each and having an installed base of fifty people in the world. Do you really think programmers would "exploit the features" of the respective hardware?

What, you mean like the PS3

Exactly - noone makes use of the PS3 right now when 360 has the advantage.

C64 was dominant in Europe for all the eighties (it was todays' PS2 if you want). But when the market was convinced to switch to 16bit, the Amiga consolidated its superiority over the rival pretty quickly. I guess after Shadow of the Beast ST owners could only wish to have something on par with the ami, not better.

[bcass]

C64 was dominant in Europe for all the eighties (it was todays' PS2 if you want).

Errrm, that's not quite true though is it. The ZX Spectrum was big too. Remember - most of Eastern Europe were using cheap ZX Spectrum clones. They certainly weren't using C64s.

[mcgeezer]

Yeah I gotta say the Speccy was huge in England and rightly so, it was a class machine.

It's funny because alot of people always recall that the three best 8bit machines were the Speccy, C64 and Amstrad 464. They seem to forget about the Atari 800XL which was far superior to all of them. Many a good shmup came out for the 800XL - Zybex, Screaming Wings, Warhawk, Panther , River Raid, Dropzone to name but a few that all were better on the 800XL than the other 8 bits. You'll actually find that some of the game music on an 800XL is better than the C64 too, mainly all the Rob Hubbard stuff.

Mind you, the C64 did have some good games though - I can't deny that - I loved Raid over Moscow, Zaxxon and beachead.

[Turrican]

C64 was dominant in Europe for all the eighties (it was todays' PS2 if you want).

Errrm, that's not quite true though is it. The ZX Spectrum was big too. Remember - most of Eastern Europe were using cheap ZX Spectrum clones. They certainly weren't using C64s.

We've been through this, bcass. I recognize the Speccy being big in the UK, and surely on the eastern countries. But I still think on the whole C64 had the biggest stake. I guess the quantity of produced software should come to help, lacking any true data on these systems sales.

[Emperor Fossil]

They seem to forget about the Atari 800XL which was far superior to all of them.

Aaargh. I'm sure we'll end up at loggerheads over this, but dude, that's just totally wrong. < >

[bcass]

We've been through this, bcass. I recognize the Speccy being big in the UK, and surely on the eastern countries.

And Spain, Portugal, Poland, and the Netherlands. Hell, even some moderate sales in the USA (under the Timex brand).

[MJR]

Aah, Atari800XL. I've totally forgot about this exotic little machine. It was on its road to something until it was crushed by C64.

Here is a neat site with screenshots to XL games; more than anything it proves why early C64 games such as bruce lee looked so primitive; they were ported straight from Atari! (bruce lee was a fun game, though)

http://www.qlam.com/atari/screenlist.html

[Ceph]

They seem to forget about the Atari 800XL which was far superior to all of them.

Aaargh. I'm sure we'll end up at loggerheads over this, but dude, that's just totally wrong. < >

No, that's just totally correct. Atari XL was technically superior to C=64 and pretty much all other 8bit home computers. Look it up, Wikipedia is your friend.

[mcgeezer]

They seem to forget about the Atari 800XL which was far superior to all of them.

Aaargh. I'm sure we'll end up at loggerheads over this, but dude, that's just totally wrong. < >

The only place the Atari 8Bits fell short was in their crap tape loading times - games would take forever to load which back in the day was a big thing cos 5'1/4 inch drives cost a bomb (I believe it was a 1080 drive for the Atari).

Disk drives wer'nt too common in the UK.

[Turrican]

They seem to forget about the Atari 800XL which was far superior to all of them.

Aaargh. I'm sure we'll end up at loggerheads over this, but dude, that's just totally wrong. < >

No, that's just totally correct. Atari XL was technically superior to C=64 and pretty much all other 8bit home computers. Look it up, Wikipedia is your friend.

Almost definitive proof that raw power means nothing. (still, thanks to the Atari 800 and to McLean for coding Dropzone on it!)

@bcass: ok, I take it back the PS2 comparison. C64 wasn't probably as dominant as PS2 is / was until recently. But it still had the biggest slice of the pie, don't you agree? (and hey, I noticed how you took the USA into our completely EU-centered discussion, that's unfair )

[Emperor Fossil]

They seem to forget about the Atari 800XL which was far superior to all of them.

Aaargh. I'm sure we'll end up at loggerheads over this, but dude, that's just totally wrong. < >

No, that's just totally correct. Atari XL was technically superior to C=64 and pretty much all other 8bit home computers. Look it up, Wikipedia is your friend.

No, it had a faster processor, but its narrow sprites (or Player Missiles, as Atari called them) meant that if you wanted a decent number of moving objects on the screen you had to resort to software sprites, expending the majority of your extra processing power drawing them to the screen..

It had a palette of 256 colours, yet in the most commonly used resolution (160x192) it could only display a 4-colour bitmap. You could use the PMs to add spot colour to the that background, but this meant your game would have an even greater reliance on software sprites. You could also add colour by using the DLI, but this generally boiled down to bands of horizontal colour, similar to the 'raster-bar' effects seen on the c64, and so wasn't widely useful (though the Lucasarts games used it wisely).

Not only that, but the hires mode was limited to 2 colours (technically 1 colour at 2 different hues), and you couldn't mix resolutions along a scanline without doing some arcane trickery that was still terribly limited and chewed up even more processor time.

You could drop down to 80x192 mode to try to get more colour (9 colours *or* 16 hues of the one colour), but at that resolution you've got some seriosuly fat-momma pixels on your hands.

On the c64 the colour use was much more flexible. You had a smaller palette (16 colours) but greater freedom to use all or most (depending on the mode) of those colours on screen at once (at 160x200 res). And that's without even including the extra colours added when sprites are added to the scene. On top of that, in char-mode you could freely mix hires and multi-colour chars, with each hires char having an independant colour selectable from the first 8. In full hires mode (ie: not mixed with mulitcolour chars) you could choose any one of the 16 colours per character block, with a shared backround colour across the screen, at a res of 320x200. Switch to hires bitmap mode, and you gain a selectable background colour per 8*8 pixel cell, giving you 2 freely selectable colours per block (vs the Atari's 2 colours per screen). And all that is without resorting to the undocumented graphics tricks later discovered in the c64's life.

The c64's wider sprites were more useful in general, and again you could mix hires and multicolour sprites freely.

Also SID > POKEY.

Realistically, the Atari had the edge in terms of processor heavy tasks such as 3d, while the c64 had the edge when it came to 2d games, which of course is what the bulk of games at the time were, so to say the Atari was 'far superior,' or even 'technically superior' is either just wishful thinking or a failure to see the whole picture.

...and breathe.

Sooo... from ST vs Amiga to Atari800 vs c64. What's next for us? The calculator wars?