Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Amiga vs console vs PC  (Read 13510 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline biggun

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Apr 2006
  • Posts: 397
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.greyhound-data.com/gunnar/
Re: Amiga vs console vs PC
« on: September 28, 2014, 06:42:11 AM »
The AGA machines were good platforms for 2D games and Adventures.
That AGA did not support Chunky pixels was a drawback for 3D...
If the A1200 and CD32 would have had fastmem the 68020 CPU would have been much faster.
But for the controlling work that is neede for typical 2D game the CPUs were fast enough without fastmem.
AGA was a nice improvement over OCS/ECS.
But it was not the earth shaking jump that many wished it to be.

But for AGA ++ some great upgrades were in the pipe.
A twice as fast blitter and Chunky 16bit direct mode was planned.
Combined with a CPU with fastmem the AGA++ machines would
have been both great for 2D games and very good for 3D games.

Offline biggun

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Apr 2006
  • Posts: 397
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.greyhound-data.com/gunnar/
Re: Amiga vs console vs PC
« Reply #1 on: September 29, 2014, 11:40:47 AM »
AMIGA is and was good machine.

Look back at game like SWORD OF SODAN, HYBRIS, or XENON
These 512K memory and the 68000@7 Mhz was more than fast enough for them.
These games really made good use of the capabilites of OCS chipset with 512 KB.


Later AMIGA models were rarely used fully.
2MB Chipmemory was common even with later ECS AMIGA.
Now imagine how nice and smooth a  SWORD OF SODAN for 2 MB with 4 times the background images and the sprite animation would have looked?
It certainly would have looked breathtaking.
Or imagine a good STREET FIGHTHER port making maximum use of 2 MB Chipmem.

The AGA machines had 2 MB chipmem, 256 colors and faster CPU.

Regarding Audio:
For games 8bit audio samples with own volume per channel is great.
With own volume per sample this give great sound effects for games.

In theory more than 4 channels would have made coding easier.
But on the other hand a 68020 with fast-mem has more than enough computing power to mix many channels together in real time.

Imagine if games would have been designed for AGA machines with 2 MB fast and 2 MB chip.
The typical 2D game has enough free CPU to allow real time mixing of 8 channels modules.

So you can imagine now a SWORD OF SODAN with 256 colors,4 times the animation frames and 8 channel audio sound in the background.

Or imagine a 2D Game like XENON in 256 colors, with 4 times as many sprite animations, and super mixed sound.

If games would have been designed for AGA Amigas + fastmem then these type of games would have been possible.

Offline biggun

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: Apr 2006
  • Posts: 397
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.greyhound-data.com/gunnar/
Re: Amiga vs console vs PC
« Reply #2 on: September 29, 2014, 11:52:06 AM »
Just take a look at NEO-GEO

The NEO-GEO console had so many wonderful 2D games.
Take a look when these games game out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Neo_Geo_games

 
Most games game out after and years after the AGA amigas.

The AGA AMIGA could have run games in similar quality to the NEO GEO games.
If these games would have been designed to make use of 2MB chipmem and fastmem.

For all the 2D games you do not need much CPU power.
The 68020 of the A1200 was already oversized for the type of games.

In theory similar quality 2D games could have been come out for the CD32.
There was certainly market for these games.