PAL or NTSC? Was PAL a 'better' Video Resolution?

[slaapliedje]

I've seen many games not even work in NTSC, or have corrupted colors (Hudson Hawk through whdload is one)

@prowler
Yeah, it's the 1200/4000 (All the AGA Machines?) that have that feature.  There is also a jumper on the A4000 motherboard (not sure about the A1200) that lets you choose PAL or NTSC as default.  Switched mine to PAL for the above issues.  If I ever get my second Amiga 4000D from Discreet... then I'll leave that switched to NTSC, because the Video Toaster I bought from them (haven't been able to use yet... :madashell:) requires NTSC.

Yeah, the whole NTSC vs PAL thing has been a pain for the Amiga.  For the Atari ST, most games ran in NTSC, which for earlier games where programmers didn't take advantage of Amiga's custom chipset, the Atari ST versions appeared better (read faster) because of this.

Of course once about '89 (maybe '88?) or so rolled around the Amiga games definitely got better looking overall.  Shadow of the Beast for the Atari ST for one was absolutely crap looking in comparison.

slaapliedje

[slaapliedje]

Depends on the monitor.

Agreed, I have a LCD connected through the VGA out on my Indivision AGA, works wonders.  The only 'flicker' I really notice is when on higher resolutions, (namely the interlaced ones) is a weird artifact of the mouse cursor and windows/icons when they're moved.  But that's just in workbench, as opposed to in any games.

That's sweet about the tool types for PAL and NTSC.  My question is, for games that are known not to work in one or the other, why aren't they in the stock setup for them?

slaapliedje