Higher resolution Dooms?

[doctorq]

To be honest, there are no really playable 68k versions of Quake out there to be found. BlitzQuake and the original ClickBoom Quake of course works, and in really low resolutions you COULD play through the game if you are sadistic...

When I ran BlitzQuake on my 060/Mediator setup it ran just as fast as the ClickBoom port on my PPC equipped A4000, and faster than any of the DOOM ports I have tried.

[doctorq]

The ClickBoom port on your PPC? The PPC doesn't matter at all in this case since the ClickBoom version doesn't support PPC (unless there is some patch for the game, I haven't bothered).

...furthermore, Quake doesn't run faster than the Doom ports   in general. You must have tried out some really lousy Doom port if that's the case. I've ran Doom ports on my B1230 that were far more playable than Quake on a 060, with or without GFX-card.

Maybe you have higher expections than I have. As for lousy Doom port, I have always used ADoom, since I haven't bothered to find any other ports because it plays nicely on my systems. And BlitzQuake runs faster than this Doom port on the same system (060/Mediator).

[doctorq]

But, the framerate IS low, and a 68k Amiga CAN'T do the game justice (or rather, the versions that exist today for the 68k Amiga don't do the game justice). That is not me being subjective, that is a fact.

How is this not you being subjective? I would like to see the page which says this is fact.

So, yes, I might be subjective on the "playable" matter, but if someone considers the game is done justice on a 68k Amiga, please step up and explain why that is (for any other reason than the one that it is Quake on the Amiga and that it is great that it can be, and has been, done).

Why not turn it the other way around? Your only argument seems to be that the FPS rate is to low, but that would be obvious if compared to the game running on a PC, running the same screensize, etc.

As I see it, playability can't be determined by FPS, only by the person playing.