So I told my Amiga-loving friend at high school the the PC version was far better. He was deeply offended of course, but got his first PC less than a year later.
So I told my Amiga-loving friend at high school the the PC version was far better. He was deeply offended of course, but got his first PC less than a year later.
With so many games that were ported across systems with a lot of varying capabilities, and quality of programming, we need good insight into what versions of the classics are best represented on what platform.
I stumbled across /v/s gaming recommendations and they are chock full of little tidbits like this that I can't find anywhere else.
Anyway, I was looking at amiga emulation and what is worthwhile pursuing on it (since home computer ports often involve the disk swapping and other headaches), and there wasn't a lot of info out there. You'd think a community as allegedly passionate as the Amiga people would have a lot of details on things like this.
Instead the last time I looked the recommendation was "Turrican II" which doesn't blow my doors off.
A few years ago we felt nostalgic and emulated a bunch of games, and while it was nice to play them again some of that magic had been lost.
Some time later we were round at a friend's house and he had a real Amiga 500 hooked up to an Amiga monitor and a joystick. He loaded up Turrican 2.
All I can say is playing the game on real hardware was a far more satisfying experience than playing on an emulator. My friend played it for about half an hour and was hooked!
I can't really define why it is that real hardware feels better. It's probably placebo but that's not the whole story.
Modern computers can easily get the same sound of course, but it is hard to emulate that sound based on the original game data.
Yes the Amiga releases could have been better
What graphics acceleration did Dune 2 support or did it only support un-accelerated VGA or SVGA? If it was un-accelerated, as was common on the 486, the Amiga's GPU should have helped the Amiga's slower CPU keep up as the CPU wouldn't have to handle the graphics work.
As for swapping floppies, was the game not installable to a hard drive? I'm sure the PC version would have required lots of floppy swapping as well if it even supported that option.
It really sounds to me like Dune 2 was a lazy port.
Unfortunately, greater, better tricked out Amigas never sold in the numbers required to make them a commercial target. By 1992, it was apparent that things were not only tough, but a disaster. (Saying that as a die-hard fan.)
Then it seemed that most of the top Amiga development talent focused their efforts on trying to imitate Doom on the Amiga, with minimal success, rather than making the most of what AGA Amigas were actually capable of.
The largest number of Amiga games was in 1990 when it nearly tied with DOS, which was 4 years older than the Amiga and the Amiga games didn't really get rolling until the Amiga 500 in 1988.
But the killer was RAM no doubt. 1MB on the Amiga, while my PC had 4MB. Under DOS you absolutely had to make sure the RAM was available to the game if you wanted all the digitized sounds and music.
In these days it would have been entirely software rendering. The Amiga had 32 colours available, while I'm sure Dune 2 ran VGA on the PC. I remember them both looking quite similar though as the sandy theme was forgiving.
The DOS version had no floppy option as a HDD was expected. Few people were lucky enough to own a HDD on the Amiga.
Amigas by then also had the AGA chipset which could do 256 colours from a palette of 16.7 million colors. Your memories seem to be out of sync.
Lots of Amigas in 1993 had hard drives. Your comment is a really poorly researched.
The Amiga had a GPU which could throw pixels around without the CPU needing to do much, but for 3D games, lots of floating point calculations had to be made. The Motorola CPUs often didn't have FPUs while the 486 had it built into every one. The 486 came out at just the right time for Doom to be workable.
Commodore failed to get the AAA chipset done because Irving Gould defunded the R&D department years before.
"Because Doom was written to run on early 386 and 486 processors which often lacked a floating-point unit entirely, and its use was slow even when present, the game was written to exclusively use fixed point math." [0]
It was also very simple to understand and well documented, and small and responsive. I think if a computer was made today where everything was treated with the utmost care for latency, that could make a difference.
Imagine a user interface which had effectively zero latency, and no loading times at all.
You see these things happening today with things like the Apple VR headset and its custom real-time compute co-processor. VR requires a kind of low-latency operation that was par for the course w/ home computers, including the Amiga itself (partly because analog CRT displays were themselves very low latency compared to current garden-variety LCD's) but is seen as very high-end today.
PCs were aimed at business. They were a cost-saver. You could iterate fast because businesses have cash, and are eolljng to spend it. Show them that spending on PC saves money, and you can ship fast enough. The churn was insane, but it didn't matter. (And I was fortunately on the receiving end of discarded hardware.)
I understood this point when I inherited a "broken" dot matrix printer. I took the head apart cleaned it all up, put it together and it worked. But j already had a printer, so i offered to return it. I wad told "no thanks, the person now has an inkjet, they don't want rhe for matrix back. Being "broken" was an excuse to get an upgrade.
Turns out the home market didn't want a new one each year. They didn't want new generations of hardware and software every 5 minutes. Amigas (and Apple 2s) were sold only slightly improved for almost a decade after first release.
PCs won because its easier to sell to business than the home. It wasn't Doom that killed Amiga it was Lotus 123.