Wings of Death was better on the ST. Most 3D games were better on the ST (extra 1 MHz, and didn't use the blitter on the amiga).
Printable View
Wings of Death was better on the ST. Most 3D games were better on the ST (extra 1 MHz, and didn't use the blitter on the amiga).
What were the main points to the ST versions advantage? I've played both versions, but never directly compared them one after the other.
This video comes to the conclusion that the ST version has better music, but it seems a bit arguable to me (Amiga version seems to be a little higher quality, but also duller/muffled, kinda like a lot of SNES Vs MD music comparisons)
The IN-GAME music (although the title screen is IMO better on the ST, it's arguable). Fully chiptune style tunes on the Amiga usually don't sound all that great.
EDIT: The Atari-ST version also supports NTSC, while the Amiga one doesn't.
Turrican 2 is better on the Amiga, but is far more impressive on the ST. The ST version is actually pushing the system, same can't be said about the Amiga version.
Atari home systems don't do much for me unless it's arcade ports, and even then they're really basic. But very simple and fun when you're with friends. But overall, I could pass on the 2600, 7800 and their ilk. In fact I don't own any Atari stuff :|
Now Atari ARCADE games are a totally different story. I'm in the process of buying a Tempest cabinet, and I could probably play Centipede from now until God knows when..
That`s why I specified `most of what I like for it `. There certainly are games where the ST version is better but for the games that really interest me, there aren`t many I can think of. I wouldn`t mind seeing a list, though. I`m always willing to re-try games to see if I have changed my mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thenewguy
That it does, along with several other high quality arcade ports from the early 80s. This is by far one of my favorite systems to play, hands down. It's pick up and play nature makes it fun for a short burst of gaming anytime. The controllers do suck, though - I wind up using a Genesis controller more often than not.
As far as the worst console - I'll go with the 5200 - It tried to be too many things at once, and failed on all accounts.
Yeah, but the european ones are ok... at least they work.
The advantage of using the same standard connection ;)
It's a tough call between it and the Jaguar. I'd say the 5200 is worse because of the controller.
Sorry, but the C64 isn't as good because: 1 - it has a floppy so slow you'll kill yourself waiting for anything to load; 2 - the CPU is almost half the speed of the A8's; not nearly as strong support from user groups. It has slightly better graphics and sound, but not enough to make it worth the stupidly slow floppy.
SOME ports look better than the A8 port mainly because they're much newer and benefit from the learning curve in making said ports.
The biggest problem with the A8 seem to be sprites. Crownland has a ton of flickering :S. Any good info on why? Can the A8 do better than that?
It's mainly programmed for PAL A8s, when you play it on an NTSC system there's loads of flickering, almost to the point where it's unplayable.
Anyway, I have pretty much every Atari system save for the Jag and 16/32-bitters. The 2600 and A8 are some of my favorite systems and the 5200 and 7800 aren't slouches either. Personally I think the 5200 is a rather malinged system, as I can tell from the responses I've seen so far in this thread (!). The controllers are a little lackluster but the library is anything but, save for only a handful of stinkers. As for the Lynx, I just recently picked up a Lynx II again a few weeks ago. I've had two of them before, one was an original Lynx that suddenly died one day, and the other was a Lynx II that I sold almost two years ago and wound up regretting.
I've had a Jag before as well and there are some games I really like such as Tempest 2K and Cannon Fodder, but the library isn't quite compelling enough for me to get one again. The ST is fairly interesting but now that I have an Amiga it seems a bit redundant to have one IMO.