^Yeah, I don't need to know what a console can do to enjoy it's games, although I was into having that argument 6-8 years ago. If I prefer Sega it's because I prefer arcade/action games in general.
^Yeah, I don't need to know what a console can do to enjoy it's games, although I was into having that argument 6-8 years ago. If I prefer Sega it's because I prefer arcade/action games in general.
I don't think it's clear cut. People forget that the original Amiga version of Shadow of the Beast came out in 1989. I think that edges out Revenge of Shinobi in the graphics department. Shooter wise, I think Truxton didn't quite match the likes of Battle Squadron. Space Harrier 2 was not super impressive anyway, but the Amiga version is actually very close to the Genesis version. By the end of 1990, the Genesis/MD is just starting to pull away from the Amiga with games like Thunder Force III.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yohko16
Yeah, the cartridge size was the big thing. One Amiga disk is a smidge larger than a 6 megabit cartridge and two disks was common for action games. As we all know, Strider was the first 8 megabit cartridge in 1990 and that size wasn't common until the following year. Then again, Desert Strike went from an 8 meg cart to 3 Amiga disks, so obviously the size isn't exactly a 1:1 comparison. Still, I think this gave the Amiga a small advantage until cartridge sizes got bigger.Quote:
And things just improved thereafter, as developers knew more how to use the Mega Drive palettes and as the cartridge size increased. Sonic 2, Thunder Force IV, Panorama Cotton, Flink, Soleil, Ecco the Dolphin 2, Alien Soldier and tons more Mega Drive games look fantastic!
Going by the nitpicky standards of a few people, Shadow of the Beast on Amiga takes a bit hit as far as being "impressive" because it runs in a window smaller than the screen ("super low res!") and relies on multiplexing sprites.
I don’t recall Shadow of the Beast looking low res, or Windowed, but I use a 1084s RGB monitor.
Yeaaaah it's definitely full screen. And it may be using the low resolution mode (pretty much needed to have more than 4 colors in the backgrounds) but it's the usual pixel density most games were using at the time (320px wide) so that also doesn't make sense. And complaining about sprite multiplexing when it gets the job done is just as silly (reminds me of Atari 2600 detractors claiming that Space Invaders is only possible because of a bug… even though the thing it exploits to repeat the sprites very definitely looks like an intentional feature and not a bug).
Mind, multiplexing is a pain in the ass (and the harder it's to do something the more time it'll take away from working on other parts), but doesn't mean it can't be done.
It could also draw images about 75% faithful for Laser Disc games like Space Ace and Dragon’s Lair: Time Warp. It took about 6 disks of space though.
That is the Achilles heel of the PCE, the games look really good in screenshots but as soon as stuff starts moving around it's often inferior to the Genesis. (I like the PCE too, but each system has its own strengths). It's the opposite of the Neo Geo, a console that one has to see in action to appreciate how good it was for the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yohko16
I'm also surprised Sega didn't try to combat Mario Kart with their own 2 player racing game using a DSP, I would rather have seen that than Virtua Racing with an SVP. My favorite split-screen "racing" on the Genesis is the Vs. mode in Sonic 2, I would have bought an entire game like that with more courses and playable characters.
Have you guys played a PC Engine or TG—16?
It looks like it's 275 x 200 or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sik
The Legend of Xanadu games also run in a slightly lower resolution, but are full screen.
…
*looks up screenshots*
https://www.mobygames.com/game/amiga...ShotId,173471/
OK yeah there are black borders on the sides. They presumably blend in with the sides of the monitor? (and when watching videos on YouTube, it likes to pad the sides with black too so it blends there as well, and emulators in widescreen will also pad with black borders…)
The inverse is true when it comes to slowdown. Which is why Yohko's confusing PCE R-Type for SMS R-Type should make you cringe and think through his wacky comments before agreeing.Quote:
Originally Posted by axel
R-Type for PC Engine is more difficult than the arcade version because of how much less slowdown it has than the cutting edge arcade hardware released released only 9 months earlier. R-Type for PC Engine was released 7 months before the Mega Drive itself, yet it would run like Super Gradius III if it was dropped into the Thunder Force IV engine.
It stands out more like the Neo Geo, as it can handle massive amounts of sprites in any variety of sizes with Giga Power levels of animation, without being plagued by slowdown (not that the Neo Geo itself was always immune). Plus the vibrant color and detail. Sapphire tosses around more than any other non-Neo Geo 16-bit console game (and many actual Neo Geo games) in 1-player mode, but it also handles 2-player co-op just fine.Quote:
It's the opposite of the Neo Geo, a console that one has to see in action to appreciate how good it was for the time.
However, like the Neo Geo, PC Engine and Mega Drive games need large rom sizes to contain enough assets to reach their potential. SNES/SFC games are shaped more by multiple bottlenecks.
But yeah, most of the best PC Engine games aren't in most English roms sets and are rarely seen in motion by people who use the term "moonrunes". So youtube fans pick games like Ordyne instead of Ai Cho Aniki, Final Lap Twin instead of Anearth Fantasy Stories, Tailspin instead of Future Boy Conan, Gunboat instead of Macross Eternal Love Song, etc... and then lament the lack of parallax in every game.
It's probably more like 300 x 200 (PAL screenshots would make it look worse) and it's more than likely not a hardware limitation of the Amiga. Yeah, the Amiga was more popular in Europe, but game developers also had to design their games to the North American market, for Apple IIG and IBM PC. The IBM PC used a low-res mode called 40 column, which was somewhere around 320x200 and in some cases 300x200. That's why you'd see a game as simple as Questron (on the Amiga) with the edges of the screen being one solid color.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sik
http://nerdlypleasures.blogspot.com/...or-ibm-pc.html
This guy from Lemon does a decent job of explaining why NTSC versions of Amiga games are full screen (run faster), while PAL has black bars.
Well, CGA was either 320×200 or 640×200, EGA introduced 350 lines high modes, and VGA introduced 360/720px wide (…for text mode) and 240/400/480px high modes. Though amusingly VGA is another case of not reaching the potential, as a lot of the possible video modes are not handled by the BIOS (it doesn't help that IBM was acting like it was a EGA+MCGA clone since they were too busy trying to convince people to switch to the PS/2 with its own unique video hardware).
Er, point being that PCs never had any mode less than 320px wide, which happens to be the Amiga's low resolution width. I guess the borders may have been added to make clipping simpler? (I know some 32X games do it for the same reason, e.g. Shadow Squadron)
EDIT: wait, nevermind, I recall there being a way to try VGA into doing unusual resolutions like 256×256 :P I wouldn't recommend it tho, it involves messing with the CRTC and it's very easy to screw up, and some monitors from back then could get damaged.
The Amiga can't display all 8 sprites and scroll horizontally at the same time. You need to reduce the size of the screen by 16px to get the 8th sprite back. Shadow of the Beast runs at 288px wide, 16px removed on both sides (I think the loss on the left is purely to center the screen).
EDIT: Saw a forum thread which says that a bug in the original OCS chipset can cause the 6th sprite to be lost as well, so you need to lose 32px to be sure all 8 sprites are available. This does not apply when using the COPPER to position the sprites, which is why Jim Power runs at 320x256 no problem.
It’s not a big deal. Really, people need to see (Youtube doesn’t do it justice) that game running on real hardware @60 fps and RGB. It’s a marvel to see.
A-10 Tank Killer, on the hand, is unplayable on full screen. The 3D graphics are way too much for the poor little A500. The game has a slider where you can adjust detail and screen size. I didn’t get to play it proper until a friend got a 386 PC and the game.