Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: POLL: What is the most viable Amiga platform for *you*?  (Read 25339 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline stefcep2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2007
  • Posts: 1467
    • Show all replies
Re: POLL: What is the most viable Amiga platform for *you*?
« on: February 05, 2011, 07:46:39 AM »
Quote from: WolfToTheMoon;612258
It's perfectly true what dammy said... In 1992 and after there was no way in hell Commodore could have kept up with the PC world, mainly because of the entire board being a custom chipset. it was, sadly, even in 1992, a doomed concept(for a PC, gaming consoles to this day remain an entirely custom chipsets all along).
If they went the way of a 68000 based mobo + PC expansion cards, things would have probably turned out pretty differently(strictly performance-wise).

Games is what drove PC hardware upgrades.  Its what really made graphics chips updates necessary in the PC world.  Was a plug-in 3rd party graphics card architecture vital for amiga to continue as a viable paltform?

 Well its interestingly, custom chips for consoles did not hold games back games development on them, with about a 5-6 year cycle.  IMO Commodore could have released AGA 12-18 months earlier, which would have competed with SNES and Megadrive well enough, especially if they pushed the A1200CD and a 28 Mhz '020 with even just 2 MB  FAst  RAM and would have held onto its user base.  Had they survived beyond 1994,  custom chips with high res chunky graphics and built in 3D functions could have been implemented well enough to compete with a PS1 and N64 at least, so that would have retained many users.  That custom chip system could have had a life of 5 years just like the consoles, as CPU and ram upgrades and mature programming could have more or less been good enough to produce quality games.

BTW: most viable? Sounds like AROS.  What do i use and probably will continue to? Classic hardware.