29 years later, Settlers II gets Amiga release
gamingretro.co.uk
gamingretro.co.uk
Actually same for Settlers III, I remember that one fondly as well. They lost me a bunch around the switch-to-3D era.
As an aside: what an incredible era.
Settlers 3 also worked fine on wine by the way, although personally I don't care much for it and much prefer 2 (the original, not the "10th Anniversary" remake, which is pretty bad IMO).
Sometimes launching a game is a bit tricky, buy it usually just comes down to looking in the GOG DOSBox conf file and see what they do.
The constraints often seem to encourage increased creativity. Maybe partly because of the challenge of pushing those constraints, the level playing field (when competing vs all the other developers on such platforms), and/or the lack of "pressure" (i.e. you don't have to make a game that looks like the latest Unreal 69 tech demo or whatnot)..
Maybe it's time for a new current-day platform that's similarly "constrained" on purpose?
The capabilities of the DS seem like a sweet spot. Put it in a Switch form factor and throw in a Commodore 64-like OS, complete with Python or Lua or some other language that's easy to pick up and also relevant in the broader world.
I own two Amigas. The OS boots pretty quickly and you can start using your computer. Until the invention of NVMEs did I have a PC that would boot as quickly as the Amiga. There are no distractions when using the machine, no forced updates, no stupid notifications. It just works as a computer.
I have a collection of Amiga, PS1, Dreamcast, PS2 and PS3 games. The games are relatively cheap and or free (a lot of games are abandonware or can be pirated without anyone really caring). Unlike a lot of modern titles are actual games. They are fun, pretty much just pop in the disk and play.
Playing old stuff on original hardware is a bit different (especially computers, as you noted), and there nostalgia has a greater pull I think. But even then, to experience a game as it originally was, you need to resort to that hardware. I recently used a MiSTer to compare how games looked on a CRT and modern screen, and it was super interesting to see the differences (e.g., colors being more vivid on the LCD, but effects like glowing lights were only visible on the CRT).
I recently played the original PS1 version of Resident Evil 2. There is something about the game that the original missed. There was a bleakness throughout it that is kind of missed in the remake (the remake btw was very good).
Also the CGI cutscenes on the games felt like a real treat at the time and they are not that long, just long enough to get the point across.
RE2's intro is like a few minutes long, sets up the scenario and you are playing the game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=748Tu4dUORE
The Ridge Racer 4 intro still holds up. I was gobsmacked at the time when I first saw this. It still looks pretty good despite the low resolution.
You have the fantasy consoles, where Pico-8 is probably the most well-known example.
Building a functional, modern, 3D rendering engine that meets current gamer requirements for "good enough" is also extremely challenging, time consuming, expensive, error prone, and often frustrating.
It then cascades into further difficulties about textures, modeling, rendering speed, machine requirements, compute language requirements, and "required" features.
A lot of this arrives at the expense of story, game design, and art.
If it must be c++, it must be AAA graphics (texture size, model polys, lighting complexity, shadows, physics based rendering), it must run 30 FPS on current mid-range, it must be trendy de-jour feature (open world, social tie-in, achievements, crafting, ect...), it must be always on networked, it must be cross platform, and it must be monetized - that's a lot of developers focusing on something other than - "is it fun?"
That's a lot of talent acquisition and churn, that's a lot of collab / communication / meetings, that's a lot of development hardware, that's a lot of funding focusing on something other than - "is it fun?"
It also ends up being a relatively severe barrier on "is it viable?" If it needs a million players just to break even, then you're quickly getting into the movie blockbuster pattern. Do whatever it is that sells blockbuster tickets. It it needs 50-100,000 players, then you can make a game with 5-10 people in a couple of years, sell it for $15, or something reasonable, and still break even on $75k salaries.
I loved the economy style and not many games have similar styles even today.
It was a good split between resource management and combat.
No one had this stuff.
"You needed AT LEAST a fast 486, and preferably a pentium, to run this on the PC. Being upset that an 030 isn't supported is ridiculous. Reminds me of the people back in the 90s that complained that SimCity2000 didn‘t run smoothly on their 1200.“
https://old.reddit.com/r/amiga/comments/1mp1z3v/29_years_lat...
Expecting 030 to work is not at all unreasonable, and it's also a very common A1200 configuration these days.
https://www.generationamiga.com/2020/08/30/how-24-commodore-...
“Big” Amigas weren’t common, but they definitely existed.
Oh, and I was a college student at the time.