in the 80s it wasnt even close, i used to laugh at the PC versions of games, then my friend got Wolfenstein 3D on PC & the writing was on the wall for my Amiga
I would also say 1992. Not just wolf 3d, but ultima underworld and ultima vii. The diskette swapping on amiga had gotten increasingly horrendous towards the end.
As soon as PC got VGA 256 colors, I could see the Amiga wasn't keeping up. Amiga couldn't push its AGA graphics around as fast as the PC could push its VGA graphics around...
@@madpuppet666 The Amiga 1000 came out in 1985, years before VGA was available. It was so ahead of everything else back then it almost seemed magical. Games were light years beyond anything else. Workbench was also amazing at multitasking years before that became a feature in Windows.
on ebay they were selling sparcstation cases, I wanted to get one to make a fake with solaris x86, then I wasted time and at Christmas this year they sold them all :(
Actually it was short for "STellar" or "aSTonishing". The ST was the superior system. I understand you can't accept that - that your younger years were wasted on an inferior system while the rest of us were ST-ing it up like one big party. That's okay.
@@Cyberbrickmaster1986 PC was a joke as a gaming platform. PC speaker was the de facto standard game audio solution until 1990-ish. With few games supporting anything else.
That's the thing; it didn't stay that way. If you really want to understand the tale of PC's ultimate dominance, you should put these comparisons in chronological order; from about 1988 to 1993, you'll notice that the Amiga starts out clearly ahead, but as time goes by, the Amiga games essentially don't grown and change, so the PC closes the gap, then equals, and finally surpasses the Amiga completely; culminating in the biggest video game ever Doom in 1993... which had no Amiga release at all; and if you want to know why, compare them to to Doom clones even years later released to the Amiga.
Well, that was not the fault of the Amiga Corp. but of Comodore. Which, if I may say so, completely screwed up. They had an extremely accessible and inexpensive multimedia computer (Before the term multimedia computer even existed.) with which they could have taken the world by storm. But first of all they didn't realize what potential they were just leaving behind and secondly there was extreme mismanagement and incompetence in the Comodore leadership. Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
Ooops, almost but not quite: the best computer of the '90's was an SGI, followed by a Sun Microsystems, then the Amiga, and then ATARI ST. Sorry but that's the way it is.
@@AnnatarTheMaia Yeah, that's why I said part of the 90's, but It is not fear comparing more expensive computers against the Amiga, and by the way, in those times PC games sucked, no matter how powerful the PC was, to have a decent game on those PC you had to be rich, buying expensive sound cards and RGB monitors. Then earlier 90's (92-93 more precisely) was the end of the Amiga because of more powerful computers arising on the horizon and the opportunity to buy those devices (sound cards etc) much cheaper (supply & demand), that was the final countdown on the Amiga.
@@gabrielirlanda it was the end of Amiga because Commodore went bankrupt; Dave Hynie had a new Super AGA ("AAA") ChipSet prototype done but Commodore was bankrupt. That's why PC took over. We just didn't know it at the time. I wasn't going to go to the PC because it's (still) such garbage, so I skipped it completely and went to the UNIX high end camp. Never regretted it, the best technical decision I ever made. FUCK PC!!!!!
@@AnnatarTheMaia Yes, I was probably some of the last stupids that got the A1200 for nothing in the 90's, then it was all over. But it was not the end of the Commodore because of the "bankrupt", they got bankrupt, because as mentioned, PC started to produce sound cards and display monitors cheaper, 3D games started to born, Commodore tried to 'convince' fans with the CD32 but it was a complete disaster. I used to work with UNIX in my first job to control a IBM digital printer, and yes, it is a great system. Actually I also hate PCs and I only use Apple.
bros, Amiga was killed by SNES cause the 99% of ppl used the Amiga 500 like a console, with floppies. only 1% had Amiga with hard disk and an installed OS. and then in 1995 the PS1 destroyed the PC gaming market. the gaming with real computer restarts in early 2000 with the multiplayer online. I think the games that really brought the game to PC were Ultima Online and Counter Strike first and Medal of Honor and Battlefield soon after. a mass of players. before this, nerds played Doom and Quake ( and "clones" ) no doubt, but the normals played Mario 64, NBA live, Fifa ..
The Amiga for its release time wrecked a PC which typically had no sound card and CGA. Even the PC Jr/Tandy with its 16 colors and 3 voice sound weren't always supported. When VGA and Soundblasters were the norm, the Amiga fell behind, but with a Single standard spec(baseline A500/A1000) vs an evolving PC spec, of course the PC pulled ahead.
At that time the PC was a work machine. It was never designed or marketed as a home entertainment machine. It wasn't even until 1996 and the advent of MMX instruction sets on the Pentium when it "officially" became the dominating entertainment platform in the world, which of course IT STILL IS. So the Amiga was great in the mid to late 80's, although the SNES and MEGADRIVE gave it a run for it's money. But lets face it, Doom just slapped the shit out of the pride of all the GayMiga fans out there, and they diminished and went into the West, and remained low end.
6-7 years later of Amiga maybe, but i buy after a pentium 100 in 1995 and pay much more, dont got blitter and have problems setting memory and IRQs for sound etc. in each game, in Amiga i insert a disk and work. Today i got problems or i cant play old games for PC in my actual computer like unreal II
hooankee Well that is YOUR fault, not the fault of the all encompasing history of PC's and backward compatibilty. You just have to know how to do it. First you need to understand the basics. There is always a way. Jesus man, you are on the internet! You don't even have to work it out for yourself! Just search google or join a forum and ask some questions! And sure, memory managment was a problem in DOS unless you knew how to tweak the config.sys and autoexec.bat files and load drivers into the upper memory blocks etc. But all of that only took a few hours to learn. For the most part it was just as easy as with the Amiga. And with Windows95, well it was even easier. Not to mention you got DirectX which made Windows gaming almost as fast as DOS gaming, but with the added bonuses of more colours / accelerated 2D and 3D graphics, etc.
TheVanillatech Is my fault? you cant play in quake, it works but the controls dont work good , jump and others. Unreal II not too much old but the screens glitch and is umplayable, and tons of old games dont work with dosbox or emulation but is my fault. Believe me i search, the most time in my life is wasted on internet.
hooankee Yeah of course it's your fault. If you have the reccomended specs for each of those games, and you get very low framerates, then there is something wrong and you have to use your HEAD to work out what it is. If you can't get Windows 98/XP/7 games working then you must be totally dumb. When I was younger I had to carve out extra kilobytesof RAM rom my conventional memory just to load a mouse driver into the upper memory blocks. And Unreal II and Quake cannot be compared. Quake runs on a Pentium 150Mhz just fine, or in DOSBOX with 25,000 cycles. Unreal II required much better hardware. Try running Winquake.Exe directly from windows. Problem solved.
Yes! I used to still play my C64 after getting a 486 with Doom, at times. For platformer games especially. PC was lacking there except Jazz jackrabbit. And on the PC I loved to play Worms, which was also on the Amiga, although I didn't have an Amiga then.
Well, C=64 versions of games were usually the best, even compared to Amiga in the 80s. I would say Tandy 1000 was a good PC but the Hercules/CGA stuff with internal speaker most certainly wasn't.
@@ravengaming4143 no they weren't. I would play the game on the Amiga first, then I'd get it for the Commodore64 and the Commodore64 version was usually trash. Evidence: "Lotus Esprit Turbo Challenge", "Star Control". And some games like "Dungeon Master", "Lost Patrol", "Chaos Strikes Back" didn't even exist for the Commodore64. "Eye of the Beholder" port is only being done now, almost 30 years later.
@@dennishagans6339 lol that's nonsense. You have to compare games from the same time. A 486 dx2 vs hw designed in the 80s? 😂 That's like comparing SNES with PS3 and saying SNES sucked. In this video Amiga clips are all 32 colour Amiga 500, which came out in 1987 - around the same time as Intel 386.
In the Mid to late 80's when many of these games came out, a VGA Video card for the PC, (256 color at 320x400), cost more than the entire Amiga. The early Adlib boards also cost many hundreds of dollars. The Sound Blasters became popular in the early 90's, (at several hundred dollars each), and gave the IBMs... MONO Sound! (No 4 channel stereo sound like on the Amiga). Yes eventually the PCs Devastated everyone! But during the 80's... the Amigas Rules, (and a little bit into the 90's). It just goes to show you how Gross Mismanagement can Devastate a blockbuster company! Sluggo
First: The most used VGA resolution in MSDOS Games was 320x200 up until 1995. Wolfenstein & Doom ran in that resolution back in the days. Second: When Doom came out in 1993 every mid-class PC had a VGA card and was at least a 80386 with 40MHz.
Commodore used console appraoch with making PCs - all-in-one hardware rather than 3rd party market. But ironically, it's the 3rd party that made IBM PC big.
256 color at 320x400 - it was a trick and not all cards allowed this mode, native mode was 320x200 and ISA was limiting speed. www.phatcode.net/res/224/files/html/ch31/31-01.html
@@zzador And as once-user of very basic XT-clone must note that 'til 90-91 large percentage of PC games still supported basically maxed out original IBM PC from 1981 (i.e. machine from era when Commodore was selling VICs and even C64 was just a risky R&D). PS While Wolf3D and Doom were glimpse of future to come i wonder why there was no Warcraft, Warlords II or Wizardry VII for advanced Amigas. There were too few of those to bother? First two ran ok on 386DX33 ( and Dune2 was done for Amiga, while warcraft-like RTS were done even for ZX Sp.128 clones), third ran OK on basic 286+1mb+VGA (i.e. in Amiga 500 range).
The examples given in this video are misleading. "The 8-Bit Guy" has a good overview of how CGA DOS games looked on contemporary hardware: th-cam.com/video/niKblgZupOc/w-d-xo.html
It Came from the Desert - Amiga version blows the PC out of the water. Barbarian - Amiga wins again! Gods - Graphics are on par. Amiga had far better sound effects. Music was a matter for taste. Roland CM-32L/LAPC-I had great music, lacked "Into the Wonderful" effects that Amiga and PC Soundblaster had Lost Patrol - Amiga is better! Stunt Car Racer - Only Amiga Makes it Possible! Winter Games - PC version looked and sounded like arse. Amiga was far better Marble Madness - Amiga, need I say more Lotus III - PC MT-32 sounded great, but Amiga had some brilliant music DuckTales - Amiga by miles The Three Stooges - Amiga, nyuk nyuk nyuk, Woo woo woo woo! Wings of Fury - Amiga kills the PC again Rick Dangerous - Amiga is on a killing spree! Defender of the Crown - Long live the King, Amiga. North & South - Amiga blew PC away again.
PablitaPicasita That is definitely true, since the basic Amiga 500 didn't have a very fast CPU at all, and relied on custom graphics chips, none of which helped with polygonal 3D graphics. The framerate is smooth on faster Amigas, though (goes for a lot of 3D games).
+wocko1 Amigas, for the most part, had a dedicated set of hardware. IBM PC games at the time ,were being developed for machines where sound cards were considered a luxury, as were things like VGA cards.
Marble Madness used CGA on the PC and I have to admit it wasn't that bad (and there were plenty of horrendous CGA games due to bad color combinations) but they should have used EGA. Of course nothing beat the Amiga because it was in full color and closer (graphically) to the arcade version.
At MrRetroville: You're right, when AMIGA first came, it was way better than PCs. But you know why? Because in that time, PC didn't have a decent sound card and not a decent graphic card. Only when Creative Labs did start to make Sound Blaster Cards and VGA came, PC was far superior than Amiga in all senses - again, check out differences in games such as the Secret of Monkey Island 1 and 2, Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, Elvira 1 and 2, and LOTS of others more.
Problem was that in the early 90s, most DOS games back then were ports of other versions, relying mostly on speaker sound. So not a lot was spent in recomposing music, till the arrival of wavetable cards a little later. Native MS-DOS games had better music though. But Elvira 1 and 2 has far superior music in the Amiga version. MS-DOS versions sound very poor, even with SoundBlaster cards. Eg in Elvira 1, the ambient sound theme in the garden area remains unsurpassed in the amiga version.
petr79 That's true, what you say about sounds. However, like I said, the PC soon surpassed Amiga in terms of graphics and, later on, in terms of sounds/musics. Anyway, the Commodore Amiga was a great computer, like the ZX Spectrum was in its time. All greatly important for what computers are nowadays!
Yes... I remember it being like this. I had a PC owning friend, who was especially mesmerized by the Amiga's smooth, even "parallax scrolling" screens (like in Shadow of the Beast 3) It's great how the C64 and the Amiga, were both definitely the best sounding computers in their time... Still sound great to me!
Even long after the PC had taken over and had more colours and higher resolutions, it still didn't have the smooth 2D scrolling of the Amiga. Of course post Doom it was all about 3D anyway, but I clearly remember jerky horizontal scrolling in Windows 98 that an old Amiga could do better.
The C64 sounded awesome. I thought the Amiga shared some hardware with the C64, but I learned it actually had a lot more in common with the Atari ST hardware wise.
Well, even if you don't like parallax scrolling, you have to admit that silky smooth 13 layer parallax scrolling on a 1987 home computer is pretty impressive ;)
Defender of the Crown, although only displaying 32 colors on the screen was the closest thing you'd get to VGA graphics in 1986 before such a thing existed on the PC. When it was ported on PC you simply had 16 color EGA. Same amount of colors on display as a C-64.
@@JohnnyProctor9 I owned an NES in the day and owned Defender of the Crown. The graphics were amazing for the NES. Not as good as the Amiga, but still amazing by 8-bit standards. I found the NES interface more user-friendly than the ones used on home computers that's why I feel the NES version is the best for playability. Oh yeah, you were also referring to graphics capability. On the NES you could only display 13 colors for sprites and 13 colors for background tiles from a palette of 56 colors, so I believe an NES couldn't display more than 26 colors at once with a resolution of 256x224 for the NTSC (North American version) while Amiga had 320x200 same as VGA but with only 32 colors instead of 256.
The only "video card" you needed to play DooM was a bog standard VGA card. Those were standard equipment by the time Doom came out! Failing that you could get a used one.
If you had a CGA/EGA card you also had an EGA display, so you had to buy a new display too! Realistically most PCs under 5000 could only play doom in the window the size of a postage stamp.
Sherbert's World: Not really, doom didn't do that much different in neither graphic, sound or gameplay, it wasn't anything the Amiga couldn't do, I even dare say that the sound might have been better if doom was played on amiga.
Let's face it, it wasn't before VGA and better sound cards, and the developers that knew how to use these that PC gaming finally caught up around the late 80s/early 90s. It would still take some time before it finally overtook the Amiga and left it behind. Sure the old graphics and bleeps and bloops bring back memories but I am honestly not sad that that is now far in the past.
looks like certain developers spent more time on the Amiga version because a 486 DOS pc could probably do exactly what an Amiga could do, for the exception of sound unless you had a good sound card.
I've had my Amiga 500 since 1989. My PC friends were trying to downplay the superiority of the Amiga to the PC. One of them said that all the Amiga was, was graphics and sound. I still laugh about that. My PC friends finally won me over, when titles like Doom and Wing Commander came out out the PC. The PC had come a long ways in those 4 years and really came into its own with the advent of the CD.
It didn't help commodore steering the Amiga into rocks and the still strong console market proves they lost the games lead trying to be a pc.They should of smashed sega and sony instead they handed it all to them on a plate. The pc effectively killed off the computer games market by retro-forming the notion of a $500 plus price tag.
EGA graphics were clearly inferior to the Amiga, and the Amiga tracker music was better for quite some time. Around 90-91 the DOS platform begun to receive decent ports of Amiga games and throughout 92-94 the DOS platform eventually surpassed the Amiga.
Aahh for so many years the Amiga was superior to EVERYTHING. It's a shame that Commodore sat back on their laurels. The A1200 should have been the machine to put the Amiga back on top, but it wasn't and it was merely a good piece of hardware that blended in with the rest of the market. If the A1200 had been superior to a bog standard PC then once again, Commodore would have commanded the lead and deservedly so. It's such a shame that they put so little into the A1200 and also delivered the uninspiring CD32. We could have been using Amiga's today. Imagine how great they would be!
Yeah, I agree. If i remember correctly, Commodore was pretty much finished as a company by the time the A1200 was ready to get shipped. Mediocre crap that frequently needs replacement (or successfully gives the illusion of that) beats quality hardware in a capitalist economy. Every. Single. Time.
I don't know. I am not sure I'd want to use a computer that was owned, and sold by a singular company. The PC atleast is not owned by anyone, and is completely open. Now I am not old enough to even remember the Amiga, I don't even remember seeing it anywhere when I was a kid, being from the USA, it was not very big here. I don't know how open the Amiga was. I think when Doom came around, that was pretty much the final nail in the Amiga's coffin. It's kind of a moot point now, seeing as PC's are so ridiculously powerful today, that hardly anyone has the talent to harness the full power of the more powerful hardware, which is pretty sad considering not too long ago, hardware was never powerful enough.
Joey JoeJoe Jr Shabadoo You are right, Doom was one of the nails in the Amiga's coffin (I wrote a Hub-Page about it). It's just that, pound for pound the Amiga outstripped EVERYHING for years. In terms of all round use; music, games, graphics, programming, networking etc nothing could touch the Amiga. A PC to do the same work would cost you three times as much. It really was ahead of the competition for years. Commodore eventually managed to mess it up so when the A1200 was released it was no longer ahead of the competition. They allowed everyone else to catch up and the rest, as they say, is history.
Retro Brothers True, when I first saw the Amiga 1000, and realized it was from 1985, I was like "WHAT?! you gotta be kidding me! that thing has better graphics and sound than the SNES, and it came out 5-6 years before that! unreal!" becuase up to that point, I thought computers in the 80's were what the IBM PC was, and nothing more. it was indeed way ahead of it's time. But like I said earlier, I feel safer not owning a computer that is made, and sold by one company, becuase well, commodore gave up it's technological lead by being stupid, and went bankrupt, and when that happens, you have no more support, and your hardware, and OS become door stops.
Joey JoeJoe Jr Shabadoo Yes, it was a really great piece of kit. It really was. Have a look at preceding 8-bit machines such as the Commodore 64, Sinclair ZX Spectrum, BBC Micro, Oric 1, Atari 800XL.... you'll be amazed at what developers squeezed out of such humble hardware. The thing is, at that time IBM PC's were serious money and for 'businesses only' - so all home computers were made by a company: Sinclair, Commodore, Oric, Atari.... it mattered not. You got the machine you wanted. I had a ZX Spectrum then moved on to the Amiga as the 16-bit reign began. Kudos to the Atari ST too - but the Amiga was supreme. Back then the thought of 'no Commodore' was unthinkable.
There was never even a comparison. Amiga dominated. I'm still baffled as to how Commodore lost the computer wars. Apple was crap, Microsoft was crap. Had to be a management issue. Amiga never committed itself to a solid word processing program or a business friendly platform. Big mistake. I'm amazed that Nintendo is still alive. But they are purely gaming. Commodore wanted to act like they could have both like Apple and PC has today, but never developed a solid business machine. Poor management.
Try running the games on a 7mhz cpu 1mb ram PC that costed the same as an Amiga at the time these games were released for a more accurate comparison... irony btw
I like this video: is useful to emphasize the differences between them, and the monstruous delay of PC to be competitive than Amiga! I want to remember to all who don't know: with Amiga, don't need graphics schede, sound schede, joystick-port, it's all 'ready to use'! Long live to Amiga fan!!
+Gernot Schrader Had an A2000 and i bought a A1200 when it came out although the Amiga was dying this time. But Wing Comnander and Doom killed the Amiga finally. Then i bought an 486 DX2 66 and it was a good gaming machine with VGA and Soundblaster. I was glad i didnt have to play with cga/ega and PC speaker.
Old games were really crap in PC. Amiga computers are really good at graphics processing and audio quality. But when games like Doom come the things changed...
@@juniorsilvabroadcast bad games on the PC changed in the early 90's. And the PC changed it all forever, until today. There's nothing better than a PC when it comes to play games!
Strange, I read a book on the history of computers a few weeks ago and there was no mention of the Amiga. It was as if it never existed. It was a major threat to other manufacturers, as the operating system was so efficient. The Amiga was the world's first affordable multimedia, multitasking personal computer, the AmigaOS could operate fully and multitask in as little as 250K of memory, try that on a PC.....
The Amiga was so advanced for its time, and it cost much less than an IBM PC too. You could get the Amiga and the attachment that let you run MS DOS programs for less than an IBM PC. What an incredible machine.
Umm... What are you talking about? Did you even watch the video? The Amiga had better graphics, better sound, and better... Well... Everything when it comes to gaming. The DOS was shit compared to the Amiga. It's like comparing an NES to a SNES.
Nejo Goldsmith That was until the 386-DX processors and VGA 256 colour standard and 32-bit wavetable soundcards. In other words, until around 1992/3. Then the Amiga got banged the fuck out of the ring and into the Hall Of Fame of Hasbeens. Did you even play Dune 2 on the Amiga? How about UFO Enemy Unknown? Wolfenstein 3D? What about Alone In The Dark ... oh sorry, they scrapped the port because the Amiga was too weak. It was goodnight thanks for coming to the inferior Amiga and thank fuck for that! My wrist was almost broken with all that disc swapping...
Nejo Goldsmith Yes but like I said, the Amiga was built as a home entertainment system from the A500 onwards. The PC was not. It wasn't until the corporations realised the potential untapped market as millions of households now owned a PC that the power started to shift. The 386-DX and early 486 machines had enough grunt to dominate the entire gaming industry as the premier platform, and VGA 256-colour along with the PC's modable configurations and standards such as VESA and DOS spelled "game over" for the Amiga. Pre 1992, I would have preferred my Amiga over my Megadrive, Atari-ST and most certainly over my 16-colour EGA 286 PC. But then I got a 486-sx33 in 1993 and played Doom. And the rest is history...
***** Yeah probably the bare minimum system that could even run Doom, but the "F5" low detail function (think it doubled the pixels) came in handy on the low end PC's. Still looked amazing, even running in low detail on a 25Mhz 386! XD
The Amiga was a games machine that could also do your taxes. The PC was a spreadsheet machine that could be coerced, with considerable DOS configuration skills and many pieces of extra hardware, to play a game.
A minor issue is that you're showing mostly games from a time when the Amiga had the better hardware for gaming, Deathsword especially. Both systems have been around for a very long time, and there are plenty of PC games that could blow the Amiga out of the water once VGA cards and things like the Adlib and Soundblaster happened like Stunts, Daggerfall, Quake, Bioforge, Corncob 3d, Doom, Comanche: Maximum Overkill, Magic Carpet, the list goes on. Both systems had their heyday.
The Amiga also cost 1/3 of what a PC cost back then too. Not that the Amiga was cheap though, it was £400 in the UK on 1992 when I got mine, which is £750 in todays money when adjusted for inflation. But the cheapest, bare bones entry level PC in 1992 cost at least £1000, and you'd have to lay out over £1200 for one that was capable of games. The PC came with a monitor and the Amiga was connected to a TV, but that PC would cost £2,250 in todays money. I still remember when my uncle bought a top of the range PC in 1993 that cost enough to buy a family car. Friends and neighbours came round to just stare at it, like it had beamed in from future. They were all so impressed and he was so proud, but unfortunately his day was ruined by the tactless 13 year old me saying "It only does SIXTEEN colours? Seriously? My Amiga does over four thousand. Whats that buzzing and beeping noise, wheres the music? What, it cant do music?!?! NO way! How much did this cost? Waaaahhhahahahahahaha!" It was years and years before using a PC didnt feel a massive step down from using an Amiga
Polish rhyme: "Amigowcu nie rżnij głupa, Doom nie chodzi no i dupa" "Amiga-boy don't be stupid, Doom not working, so suck", in polish language it is pretty rhyme. :oD
It's like Jurassic Park but for the Amiga! www.forbes.com/sites/marcochiappetta/2018/10/29/the-first-next-generation-68k-based-amiga-in-decades-booted-up-yesterday/?fbclid=IwAR3_BK026IW4UafG39KGJ92M0UCewN2UnwNmBD1Zb8FnpnfLsmPkBy5uu1o#43a313396d74
The Amiga was the superior being, Workbench was basically better than windows 3.1 and it was older, the games had better graphics for their time and the Super-AGA graphics were awesome for their time. PC was under and below anything. The reason why PC got more attention than AMIGA is the same reason we are not using Tesla technology for energy consumption.
+Astro Monkey Well, amiga was better than PC when it first came out, but years after years, PC's expansion cards became better and better (cpu was already better, the 386 came out in 1985/1986 and had a minimum speed of 16mhz, was a 32bits architecture, etc). PC wasn't made for gaming in the first place, so it had a very nice CPU for it's time, but it had no capabilities for graphism or sound. But it evolved constaintly and by 1987, it was ready for gaming (VGA and adlib cards were released that year). The fact that they were almost never used before let's say 1990, is that PC were still very expensive, so developpers didn't wanted to waste their time on something that almost nobody could use. If you compare a later PC game that still can run on a 386 with it's amiga port, you'll see that the PC was in some ways superior/equal, but almost never used like so (adlib still lacked wave sound) Also, AMIGA had a hardware accelerator since the begining, while PC got it only at the mid 90's (when nvidia, ati, S3, 3Dfx released their "3D" chipsets). There is almost no VGA hardware accelerator (except for some later revisions that brough "blitter", and some other stuff)
Even though the Amiga version of Stunt Car Racer looked better, it also gets a worse framerate. Not hating on the amiga, that thing was amazing for it's time.
It is important to say that the DOS version of the games you're presenting are most of them EGA (16 colors) and CGA (4 colors), not the VGA versions. Try to compare Gobliiins, The Secret of Monkey Island 1 and 2, Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, Elvira 1 and 2, Waxworks, Beneath a Steel Sky, etc, and you'll see the differences between AMIGA and a REAL PC version :) This comparison should have been done differently, comparing games with similar feature: sound cards and graphic cards.
That was kind of the point though, PCs eventually passed machines like the Amiga, but for their time both the Atari ST and Amiga kicked the shit out of their competition. It just couldn't be kept up, and as we all know Apple was the only one of these more locked down computers to survive.. for whatever reason...
Dylan Collins In those old days, PC developers were also a bit lazy to make games for the PC. It kinda reminds me what happened with ZX Spectrum and C64 machines. :)
That's also very true, the specialized hardware of systems like the Amiga made it easy to optimize the game like you would on a console, while the PC got what often appeared to be a hack job version of the game. At least this didn't last though. By the 90s the PC was arguably the dominate game machine.
Can remember buying PC version of Boulder Dash and playing under emulation on Amiga. Back in the day. Kind of even found the Spectrum version had more bling. :) I think they even fitted it into 30-40k. :)
I had a PC and played in DOS. Some of my mates had AMIGA (NEMIGA). Most of the time I played different games on the two different machines. However. Somewhere around 1990 I tried North and South on AMIGA. It was way better than PC version. I always knew PC would pass AMIGA and make it useless in a few years. The comparision of Barbarian on PC and AMIGA showed a ridculous big difference. I hated the CGA graphics from the beginning, but soon EGA and VGA came. And we dreamt of SVGA. The sound was no highlight either, but I played many games without sound (like CM1). When it came to Ports of Call I preferred it on PC. Better than AMIGA.
While the PC obviously passed the Amiga eventually, it doesn't change though that for years it was an amazing machine that pretty much blew everything else out of the water. It was a marvelously advanced machine for its time, it's just a shame they couldn't keep it up with later releases. By the time they were releasing the Amiga 4000 it was nothing but a shell of what was once a great name.
I'm sorry to disappoint you but EGA was 16 colors only, 256 colors came with VGA which as far as I know only became widespread in the early 90's, same goes for the the Soundblaster (before which the PC simply could not compete with the Amiga audio-wise). Both VGA and Soundblaster were technically created in the late 80's but the fact that games really making use of VGA and Soundblaster became the standard in like 1993 means more than when the hardware was produced.
That's all true. :) But, the natural course of the computers soon defined a winner: the PC. Anyway, Amiga still is a mark for what it was in its time, like the ZX Spectrum was with all its limitations. :)
@electrictroy2010 Most PC games in early 90s supported Roland MT-32/LAPC-1, so if you were fortunate enough to own one (yes they were expensive, but so what :) ), you'd enjoy game music which was superior that you'd get on Amiga games. Search with the keyword MT-32 in TH-cam. If you had only a lowend Adlib or Soundblaster card, then yes they normally sounded quite tinny compared to the (IMHO scratchy) Amiga music.
True... but Creative Labs presented great sound cards in the very first years of the 90's, like the PRO and PRO2 and AWE cards, which were just AWEsome!
Commodore = made perfect from day 1.. Microsoft = what do I need to buy now to make this game work, what does this say "new firmware available please download"... WTF?
The more or less IBM compatible PC was crap back then. It was the fake idea of buying a PC once and being able to bring it up to date forever with the latest hardware that brought the dead to Atari and Commodore.
I have said many times myself that the PC "standards" and "compatibilities" meant nothing. It was marketing of those lies that had ppl believe in them.
Very nicely done. I miss my Amiga so much. :( Used to play Stunt Car Racer on my Amiga quite a bit. It had a split screen multiplayer mode as well that was fun.
@scarybozo If that is the case, it's due to bad research on my side, definitely not intentional. Could you (or anyone else) link me to EGA screenshots of the games in question? There are two games called Barbarian, and they're very different - the one in this video also known as "Death Sword"... just so no one links to the wrong game. One thing I did mess up with though is - the ugly pink CGA palette is incorrect, it's what you get on modern cards.
PCs were pretty much crap in regards to gaming until they started coming with 486s. And even then "multimedia" PCs with the necessary graphics and sound cards weren't the majority of those at first. Those that had the ability were a lot more expensive than the Amiga when new. The only downside that I remember of my Amiga 500 was needing a finicky side-slot for extra RAM and the fact the timing of when I got it was on the tail end of the U.S. software market supporting it.
500 letters are too little to describe my feelings right now! Oh you woken up some memories dude! Thanks for this video! Amiga was much better than PCs for many years. Still it died. If the Amiga had advanced, instead of the PC, we would have much better machines now. Anyway, VGA did miracles for the PC. I won't forget the war against the Amiga from the adventure games making companies. As for the sound, which seems to be the main focus of this video, well, PAULA rules, plain and simple! ;)
Keen 4 & 5 had much worse graphics than several Amiga games released earlier. Shadow of the Beast had 32 color graphics with 13 layers of parallax scrolling, and it was released earlier than Keen 4&5, which had 16 color graphics and one layer of parallax? I can't remember exactly but I don't think it had more than that. And the sound was also much worse than in Beast.
Back in the day I was a Dos user and I will say that I lived in envy over the amiga games.Pretty much ever game looked better on the amiga not to mention scrolled 100x smoother.Yes over time the pc surpassed the amiga but for years the amiga had the definitive versions of many games.
You're exaggerating. I had a stock A500 too and it wasn't that bad. Maybe it's because I used to have a C64 before that. People today are too impatient! :D And as I said, most big games were hard drive installable, so if you'd gotten one of those, you could've played a lot of games off of that.
People also are forgetting how much MORE EXPENSIVE the PCs cost than an Amiga. I remember seeing Defender Of The Crown on Amiga, and it was the first time I'd seen a "movie-style" game like what we have today. There were finally enough colors to *fade* the credits in and out, etc.
When PC games used EGA graphics, games were more often than not better looking on the Amiga. Later on, when PCs got VGA graphics, graphics were often better on PC (well, more colors anyway).. however, not always! And the scrolling etc was still pretty bad on PCs.
That depends on how many colors were used. If it's an older PC game using EGA graphics, you could port the graphics directly over but it would be ugly by Amiga standards. If it's a newer PC game in 256 colors, the graphics have to be redrawn in less colors unless you were porting it to an AGA Amiga.
Commander Keen had 16 color EGA graphics and adlib sound.. even if you used a Soundblaster card. It's not very impressive technically (well it might have been for PCs at the time) but they're very cool games though! And you're right about Marble Madness, has bugged me ever since I uploaded the video.
The Amiga 500 was released in 1987. Is it propaganda to show games that are close to that date? Putting Mortal Kombat in there would be ridiculous, that game was released in 1993! The Amiga was released in 1987! And Monkey Island 1 is better on the Amiga, the music is far better.
this video was made with amiga'fanaticism...this is not real...if you compare games like oscar or mortal kombat 1 or 2 or monkey island 1 or 2..you will see that PC'versions are better so...this is pure propaganda..and you have compared amiga games vs EGA games and not vs VGA games
I don't get it. why are you comparing CGA graphics machine for office works (there were available VGA and earlier PGA (1984 yr) cards at that time and sound blasters with 8bit digitzed voice since 1988) with home computer designed for entertainment?
It was *very* expensive and I'm not sure if games supported it right away either. And those cards did not have the same silky smooth scrolling as Amiga had. I'd like to see a game running at 50 FPS with 13 layers of parallax scrolling on a 1988 PC :D
I think the Amiga music is nicer than the CD version music. And besides, there's nothing impressive about a computer playing CD audio - if I had included Monkey Island, I would have used the regular soundcard version.
Sierra did some of the worst Amiga ports I have ever seen... not only when it comes to graphics, but also optimization... they're such incredibly lazy ports, check out Space Quest 4 for a good example!
@Koomeet30 I'm sorry but was better, i'm a AMIGA fan but i can't have a computer only for games :) i tried new amiga OS but for internet you don't have support one for all : FLASH 4exampl.
Yeah true.. but the result would most often be better if the graphics were partly or completely redrawn. If you want a horror example of bad downscaling, take a look at my Space Quest 4 for Amiga longplay.
God, I didn't think the Amiga had this much of a gap over the PC back then, makes me laugh and cry that Amiga pretty much stayed still in development and PC just kept advancing.
It's not my fault PCs didn't support VGA and soundblaster when the Amiga was released ;) I might make one more with more modern DOS games but that is pretty unfair towards the Amiga.
Yeah, early DOS games were pretty bad a lot of the time. I used many old games in this video to show how big the difference was near the time the Amiga was originally released (1987).
I showed early games on purpose as I think that is more fair. The Amiga 500 was released in 1987, so I'm obviously going to show games as close to that as possible.
Yes, I agree. Finally someone who thinks this is not fair towards the Amiga.. most people complain that I'm making Amiga propaganda and not being fair towards the PC :o
Says on Wikipedia that VGA came out in 1988 but Wikipedia can very well be wrong. However, there were incredibly few VGA games until a few years later.
in the 80s it wasnt even close, i used to laugh at the PC versions of games, then my friend got Wolfenstein 3D on PC & the writing was on the wall for my Amiga
I would also say 1992. Not just wolf 3d, but ultima underworld and ultima vii. The diskette swapping on amiga had gotten increasingly horrendous towards the end.
"Test Drive III: The Passion is a racing video game developed and published by Accolade in 1990"
As soon as PC got VGA 256 colors, I could see the Amiga wasn't keeping up. Amiga couldn't push its AGA graphics around as fast as the PC could push its VGA graphics around...
What's really crazy is the Amiga 1000 came out in 1985. Think about what else was available in 1985. Nothing even came close.
@@madpuppet666 The Amiga 1000 came out in 1985, years before VGA was available. It was so ahead of everything else back then it almost seemed magical. Games were light years beyond anything else. Workbench was also amazing at multitasking years before that became a feature in Windows.
The Amiga was a badass machine. The Ferrari computer of the 1980's.
Yep. Amiga was a Ferrari, Sun was a Lamborghini, and SGI was a Bugatti.
@@AnnatarTheMaiaPC-98 was a Lexus.. Microsoft is a Hyundai. I hate microsoft today.
I saw some Ultra at the inf science faculty of Genoa, 20,000$ per machine. my jaw dropped. it has been your dream computer for years and years.
on ebay they were selling sparcstation cases, I wanted to get one to make a fake with solaris x86, then I wasted time and at Christmas this year they sold them all :(
@@AnnatarTheMaia - What about the Sharp X68000?
Because some people still cling to the belief that if a handful of hobbyists cling to it, it must still be a valid platform.
Where is Doom?
Where it has always been. Which doesn't include Amiga
It's in the 90's, the next decade, when Commodore got bankrupt after years of mismanagement.
How good was the music on First Samuri?! What a game that was.
Actually it was short for "STellar" or "aSTonishing". The ST was the superior system. I understand you can't accept that - that your younger years were wasted on an inferior system while the rest of us were ST-ing it up like one big party. That's okay.
Amiga 500 was 4 or 5 years ahead of its time. Amazing system.
Ten years ahead. And some things like volumes are still ahead of their time.
Can't wait for the Amiga 500 Mini to come out next Spring, I've got mine on pre-order!
Still cannot believe pc was kept and amiga failed.
Barbarian for the PC on this video was in CGA mode.
This is the classic "won the battle but didn't win the war". It's a shame. Because they were so superior at the time to both PC and Apple.
And PC was always superior to Apple as a gaming platform!
@@Cyberbrickmaster1986 PC was a joke as a gaming platform. PC speaker was the de facto standard game audio solution until 1990-ish. With few games supporting anything else.
That's the thing; it didn't stay that way. If you really want to understand the tale of PC's ultimate dominance, you should put these comparisons in chronological order; from about 1988 to 1993, you'll notice that the Amiga starts out clearly ahead, but as time goes by, the Amiga games essentially don't grown and change, so the PC closes the gap, then equals, and finally surpasses the Amiga completely; culminating in the biggest video game ever Doom in 1993... which had no Amiga release at all; and if you want to know why, compare them to to Doom clones even years later released to the Amiga.
Deenie Beenie laughingly??
The CD32 was the first 32bit console with a cd drive in it!
Well, that was not the fault of the Amiga Corp. but of Comodore. Which, if I may say so, completely screwed up. They had an extremely accessible and inexpensive multimedia computer (Before the term multimedia computer even existed.) with which they could have taken the world by storm. But first of all they didn't realize what potential they were just leaving behind and secondly there was extreme mismanagement and incompetence in the Comodore leadership.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
no doubt Amiga was the best computer in the 80's and part of 90's. THANK YOU AMIGA!!
Ooops, almost but not quite: the best computer of the '90's was an SGI, followed by a Sun Microsystems, then the Amiga, and then ATARI ST. Sorry but that's the way it is.
@@AnnatarTheMaia Yeah, that's why I said part of the 90's, but It is not fear comparing more expensive computers against the Amiga, and by the way, in those times PC games sucked, no matter how powerful the PC was, to have a decent game on those PC you had to be rich, buying expensive sound cards and RGB monitors. Then earlier 90's (92-93 more precisely) was the end of the Amiga because of more powerful computers arising on the horizon and the opportunity to buy those devices (sound cards etc) much cheaper (supply & demand), that was the final countdown on the Amiga.
@@gabrielirlanda it was the end of Amiga because Commodore went bankrupt; Dave Hynie had a new Super AGA ("AAA") ChipSet prototype done but Commodore was bankrupt. That's why PC took over. We just didn't know it at the time. I wasn't going to go to the PC because it's (still) such garbage, so I skipped it completely and went to the UNIX high end camp. Never regretted it, the best technical decision I ever made. FUCK PC!!!!!
@@AnnatarTheMaia Yes, I was probably some of the last stupids that got the A1200 for nothing in the 90's, then it was all over. But it was not the end of the Commodore because of the "bankrupt", they got bankrupt, because as mentioned, PC started to produce sound cards and display monitors cheaper, 3D games started to born, Commodore tried to 'convince' fans with the CD32 but it was a complete disaster. I used to work with UNIX in my first job to control a IBM digital printer, and yes, it is a great system. Actually I also hate PCs and I only use Apple.
bros, Amiga was killed by SNES cause the 99% of ppl used the Amiga 500 like a console, with floppies. only 1% had Amiga with hard disk and an installed OS.
and then in 1995 the PS1 destroyed the PC gaming market. the gaming with real computer restarts in early 2000 with the multiplayer online.
I think the games that really brought the game to PC were Ultima Online and Counter Strike first and Medal of Honor and Battlefield soon after. a mass of players.
before this, nerds played Doom and Quake ( and "clones" ) no doubt, but the normals played Mario 64, NBA live, Fifa ..
The Amiga for its release time wrecked a PC which typically had no sound card and CGA. Even the PC Jr/Tandy with its 16 colors and 3 voice sound weren't always supported. When VGA and Soundblasters were the norm, the Amiga fell behind, but with a Single standard spec(baseline A500/A1000) vs an evolving PC spec, of course the PC pulled ahead.
At that time the PC was a work machine. It was never designed or marketed as a home entertainment machine. It wasn't even until 1996 and the advent of MMX instruction sets on the Pentium when it "officially" became the dominating entertainment platform in the world, which of course IT STILL IS.
So the Amiga was great in the mid to late 80's, although the SNES and MEGADRIVE gave it a run for it's money. But lets face it, Doom just slapped the shit out of the pride of all the GayMiga fans out there, and they diminished and went into the West, and remained low end.
6-7 years later of Amiga maybe, but i buy after a pentium 100 in 1995 and pay much more, dont got blitter and have problems setting memory and IRQs for sound etc. in each game, in Amiga i insert a disk and work.
Today i got problems or i cant play old games for PC in my actual computer like unreal II
hooankee
Well that is YOUR fault, not the fault of the all encompasing history of PC's and backward compatibilty. You just have to know how to do it. First you need to understand the basics. There is always a way. Jesus man, you are on the internet! You don't even have to work it out for yourself! Just search google or join a forum and ask some questions!
And sure, memory managment was a problem in DOS unless you knew how to tweak the config.sys and autoexec.bat files and load drivers into the upper memory blocks etc. But all of that only took a few hours to learn. For the most part it was just as easy as with the Amiga. And with Windows95, well it was even easier. Not to mention you got DirectX which made Windows gaming almost as fast as DOS gaming, but with the added bonuses of more colours / accelerated 2D and 3D graphics, etc.
TheVanillatech
Is my fault? you cant play in quake, it works but the controls dont work good , jump and others. Unreal II not too much old but the screens glitch and is umplayable, and tons of old games dont work with dosbox or emulation but is my fault. Believe me i search, the most time in my life is wasted on internet.
hooankee
Yeah of course it's your fault. If you have the reccomended specs for each of those games, and you get very low framerates, then there is something wrong and you have to use your HEAD to work out what it is. If you can't get Windows 98/XP/7 games working then you must be totally dumb. When I was younger I had to carve out extra kilobytesof RAM rom my conventional memory just to load a mouse driver into the upper memory blocks.
And Unreal II and Quake cannot be compared. Quake runs on a Pentium 150Mhz just fine, or in DOSBOX with 25,000 cycles. Unreal II required much better hardware. Try running Winquake.Exe directly from windows. Problem solved.
Back in the days even C64 was a superior gaming platform compared to PC.
Yes! I used to still play my C64 after getting a 486 with Doom, at times. For platformer games especially. PC was lacking there except Jazz jackrabbit. And on the PC I loved to play Worms, which was also on the Amiga, although I didn't have an Amiga then.
Well, C=64 versions of games were usually the best, even compared to Amiga in the 80s.
I would say Tandy 1000 was a good PC but the Hercules/CGA stuff with internal speaker most certainly wasn't.
@@ravengaming4143 no they weren't. I would play the game on the Amiga first, then I'd get it for the Commodore64 and the Commodore64 version was usually trash. Evidence: "Lotus Esprit Turbo Challenge", "Star Control". And some games like "Dungeon Master", "Lost Patrol", "Chaos Strikes Back" didn't even exist for the Commodore64. "Eye of the Beholder" port is only being done now, almost 30 years later.
Thats a good point and a fact, the C64 was better than the PC for games in the 1980s.
@@ravengaming4143 no way
Some of the games played in CGA mode could probably be played in EGA or VGA mode.
Lol there was no amiga version of those games to compare with.
Duke Nukem Amigo was the amiga version of 3d. It was really cool, however it required an accelerator card and extended memory to work.
When the Amiga was released on the PC you only got CGA or EGA. VGA only became widespread in the early 90ies. Only by then the PC surpassed the Amiga.
@@dennishagans6339 Nonsense comparison. When the 486 became widespread and affordable the Amiga was about 8 years old.
@@dennishagans6339 lol that's nonsense. You have to compare games from the same time. A 486 dx2 vs hw designed in the 80s? 😂 That's like comparing SNES with PS3 and saying SNES sucked. In this video Amiga clips are all 32 colour Amiga 500, which came out in 1987 - around the same time as Intel 386.
In the Mid to late 80's when many of these games came out, a VGA Video card for the PC, (256 color at 320x400), cost more than the entire Amiga. The early Adlib boards also cost many hundreds of dollars. The Sound Blasters became popular in the early 90's, (at several hundred dollars each), and gave the IBMs... MONO Sound! (No 4 channel stereo sound like on the Amiga). Yes eventually the PCs Devastated everyone! But during the 80's... the Amigas Rules, (and a little bit into the 90's). It just goes to show you how Gross Mismanagement can Devastate a blockbuster company! Sluggo
First: The most used VGA resolution in MSDOS Games was 320x200 up until 1995. Wolfenstein & Doom ran in that resolution back in the days. Second: When Doom came out in 1993 every mid-class PC had a VGA card and was at least a 80386 with 40MHz.
Commodore used console appraoch with making PCs - all-in-one hardware rather than 3rd party market.
But ironically, it's the 3rd party that made IBM PC big.
256 color at 320x400 - it was a trick and not all cards allowed this mode, native mode was 320x200 and ISA was limiting speed.
www.phatcode.net/res/224/files/html/ch31/31-01.html
@@zzador And as once-user of very basic XT-clone must note that 'til 90-91 large percentage of PC games still supported basically maxed out original IBM PC from 1981 (i.e. machine from era when Commodore was selling VICs and even C64 was just a risky R&D).
PS While Wolf3D and Doom were glimpse of future to come i wonder why there was no Warcraft, Warlords II or Wizardry VII for advanced Amigas. There were too few of those to bother? First two ran ok on 386DX33 ( and Dune2 was done for Amiga, while warcraft-like RTS were done even for ZX Sp.128 clones), third ran OK on basic 286+1mb+VGA (i.e. in Amiga 500 range).
@@zzador For new PC's, yes. The vast majority out there were lower spec'ed in 93. But VGA was prevalent, for sure.
Those old CGA games were worse than the C64 versions let alone the Amiga.
The examples given in this video are misleading. "The 8-Bit Guy" has a good overview of how CGA DOS games looked on contemporary hardware: th-cam.com/video/niKblgZupOc/w-d-xo.html
@@MnKJSGVsHMs8iOHr Bad take. Everyone with a PC was using RGB monitors, never composite TV sets.
It Came from the Desert - Amiga version blows the PC out of the water.
Barbarian - Amiga wins again!
Gods - Graphics are on par. Amiga had far better sound effects. Music was a matter for taste. Roland CM-32L/LAPC-I had great music, lacked "Into the Wonderful" effects that Amiga and PC Soundblaster had
Lost Patrol - Amiga is better!
Stunt Car Racer - Only Amiga Makes it Possible!
Winter Games - PC version looked and sounded like arse. Amiga was far better
Marble Madness - Amiga, need I say more
Lotus III - PC MT-32 sounded great, but Amiga had some brilliant music
DuckTales - Amiga by miles
The Three Stooges - Amiga, nyuk nyuk nyuk, Woo woo woo woo!
Wings of Fury - Amiga kills the PC again
Rick Dangerous - Amiga is on a killing spree!
Defender of the Crown - Long live the King, Amiga.
North & South - Amiga blew PC away again.
PablitaPicasita That is definitely true, since the basic Amiga 500 didn't have a very fast CPU at all, and relied on custom graphics chips, none of which helped with polygonal 3D graphics.
The framerate is smooth on faster Amigas, though (goes for a lot of 3D games).
wocko1
And now hand me a shump that runs on the Amiga that can utterly destroy Raptor - Call of Shadows.
Well Amiga was pretty much done for when Raptor - Call of the Shadows came out. That was one of the best DOS shmup of all time, that and Tyrian
+wocko1 Amigas, for the most part, had a dedicated set of hardware. IBM PC games at the time ,were being developed for machines where sound cards were considered a luxury, as were things like VGA cards.
+Bastet Furry Battle Squadron.
The Amiga owns the PC Versions!!!!
i own 2 and 2 c64 and i am proud of them running today!
Marble Madness used CGA on the PC and I have to admit it wasn't that bad (and there were plenty of horrendous CGA games due to bad color combinations) but they should have used EGA. Of course nothing beat the Amiga because it was in full color and closer (graphically) to the arcade version.
At MrRetroville: You're right, when AMIGA first came, it was way better than PCs. But you know why? Because in that time, PC didn't have a decent sound card and not a decent graphic card.
Only when Creative Labs did start to make Sound Blaster Cards and VGA came, PC was far superior than Amiga in all senses - again, check out differences in games such as the Secret of Monkey Island 1 and 2, Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, Elvira 1 and 2, and LOTS of others more.
Problem was that in the early 90s, most DOS games back then were ports of other versions, relying mostly on speaker sound.
So not a lot was spent in recomposing music, till the arrival of wavetable cards a little later.
Native MS-DOS games had better music though.
But Elvira 1 and 2 has far superior music in the Amiga version. MS-DOS versions sound very poor, even with SoundBlaster cards. Eg in Elvira 1, the ambient sound theme in the garden area remains unsurpassed in the amiga version.
petr79 That's true, what you say about sounds. However, like I said, the PC soon surpassed Amiga in terms of graphics and, later on, in terms of sounds/musics. Anyway, the Commodore Amiga was a great computer, like the ZX Spectrum was in its time. All greatly important for what computers are nowadays!
Quazatronn Also, it's easy to forget just how early the Amiga was originally released... in 1985.
That's 4 years later, dude... 4 years is like saying that the Playstation was superior to the snes : well, 1991 vs 1994... Of course it is.
Quazatronn
The first Soundblaster Cards were shit compared with the Amiga sound abilities.
Yes... I remember it being like this. I had a PC owning friend, who was especially mesmerized by the Amiga's smooth, even "parallax scrolling" screens (like in Shadow of the Beast 3) It's great how the C64 and the Amiga, were both definitely the best sounding computers in their time... Still sound great to me!
And then came 256 color monitors and graphics cards, and then game Doom; and that was all she wrote for the Amiga.
Even long after the PC had taken over and had more colours and higher resolutions, it still didn't have the smooth 2D scrolling of the Amiga. Of course post Doom it was all about 3D anyway, but I clearly remember jerky horizontal scrolling in Windows 98 that an old Amiga could do better.
The C64 sounded awesome. I thought the Amiga shared some hardware with the C64, but I learned it actually had a lot more in common with the Atari ST hardware wise.
Well, even if you don't like parallax scrolling, you have to admit that silky smooth 13 layer parallax scrolling on a 1987 home computer is pretty impressive ;)
Brings back memories of the Amiga masterrace! :)
To prove the Amiga at its time was superior you only needed to show the Defender of the Crown comparison.
+Montahue Agree, the Amiga at its best!
Defender of the Crown, although only displaying 32 colors on the screen was the closest thing you'd get to VGA graphics in 1986 before such a thing existed on the PC. When it was ported on PC you simply had 16 color EGA. Same amount of colors on display as a C-64.
How about the NES version? Lol! 😆
@@JohnnyProctor9 I owned an NES in the day and owned Defender of the Crown. The graphics were amazing for the NES. Not as good as the Amiga, but still amazing by 8-bit standards. I found the NES interface more user-friendly than the ones used on home computers that's why I feel the NES version is the best for playability. Oh yeah, you were also referring to graphics capability. On the NES you could only display 13 colors for sprites and 13 colors for background tiles from a palette of 56 colors, so I believe an NES couldn't display more than 26 colors at once with a resolution of 256x224 for the NTSC (North American version) while Amiga had 320x200 same as VGA but with only 32 colors instead of 256.
Then Doom came out, and the Amigans stopped laughing.
providing you had 400 bucks for the latest graphics card weirdo
The only "video card" you needed to play DooM was a bog standard VGA card. Those were standard equipment by the time Doom came out! Failing that you could get a used one.
If you had a CGA/EGA card you also had an EGA display, so you had to buy a new display too! Realistically most PCs under 5000 could only play doom in the window the size of a postage stamp.
Sherbert's World: Not really, doom didn't do that much different in neither graphic, sound or gameplay, it wasn't anything the Amiga couldn't do, I even dare say that the sound might have been better if doom was played on amiga.
nonsense the amiga was rubbish at 3d
It's like night and day. I'm glad I bought the right machine.
hooray for the amiga ;-)
I prefer Amiga...DOS...Amiga...DOS!
You can love both. There's no shame.
And as we all know, the winner is PC.
Rip Amiga
It was the natural course of computers' life. :)
Since the early 90's until today, PCs became a KING machine to play games!
yeah it was great , till doom. vga whooped its ass
Let's face it, it wasn't before VGA and better sound cards, and the developers that knew how to use these that PC gaming finally caught up around the late 80s/early 90s.
It would still take some time before it finally overtook the Amiga and left it behind.
Sure the old graphics and bleeps and bloops bring back memories but I am honestly not sad that that is now far in the past.
looks like certain developers spent more time on the Amiga version because a 486 DOS pc could probably do exactly what an Amiga could do, for the exception of sound unless you had a good sound card.
I've had my Amiga 500 since 1989. My PC friends were trying to downplay the superiority of the Amiga to the PC. One of them said that all the Amiga was, was graphics and sound. I still laugh about that.
My PC friends finally won me over, when titles like Doom and Wing Commander came out out the PC. The PC had come a long ways in those 4 years and really came into its own with the advent of the CD.
It didn't help commodore steering the Amiga into rocks and the still strong console market proves they lost the games lead trying to be a pc.They should of smashed sega and sony instead they handed it all to them on a plate. The pc effectively killed off the computer games market by retro-forming the notion of a $500 plus price tag.
EGA graphics were clearly inferior to the Amiga, and the Amiga tracker music was better for quite some time. Around 90-91 the DOS platform begun to receive decent ports of Amiga games and throughout 92-94 the DOS platform eventually surpassed the Amiga.
Heck, even the C-64 versions of a lot of these games blow the PC versions away!
not really....
Who would think that ABDOMINATION would became major gaming platform
Aahh for so many years the Amiga was superior to EVERYTHING.
It's a shame that Commodore sat back on their laurels. The A1200 should have been the machine to put the Amiga back on top, but it wasn't and it was merely a good piece of hardware that blended in with the rest of the market.
If the A1200 had been superior to a bog standard PC then once again, Commodore would have commanded the lead and deservedly so.
It's such a shame that they put so little into the A1200 and also delivered the uninspiring CD32. We could have been using Amiga's today. Imagine how great they would be!
Yeah, I agree.
If i remember correctly, Commodore was pretty much finished as a company by the time the A1200 was ready to get shipped.
Mediocre crap that frequently needs replacement (or successfully gives the illusion of that) beats quality hardware in a capitalist economy. Every. Single. Time.
I don't know. I am not sure I'd want to use a computer that was owned, and sold by a singular company. The PC atleast is not owned by anyone, and is completely open. Now I am not old enough to even remember the Amiga, I don't even remember seeing it anywhere when I was a kid, being from the USA, it was not very big here. I don't know how open the Amiga was. I think when Doom came around, that was pretty much the final nail in the Amiga's coffin. It's kind of a moot point now, seeing as PC's are so ridiculously powerful today, that hardly anyone has the talent to harness the full power of the more powerful hardware, which is pretty sad considering not too long ago, hardware was never powerful enough.
Joey JoeJoe Jr Shabadoo You are right, Doom was one of the nails in the Amiga's coffin (I wrote a Hub-Page about it). It's just that, pound for pound the Amiga outstripped EVERYHING for years. In terms of all round use; music, games, graphics, programming, networking etc nothing could touch the Amiga. A PC to do the same work would cost you three times as much. It really was ahead of the competition for years. Commodore eventually managed to mess it up so when the A1200 was released it was no longer ahead of the competition. They allowed everyone else to catch up and the rest, as they say, is history.
Retro Brothers True, when I first saw the Amiga 1000, and realized it was from 1985, I was like "WHAT?! you gotta be kidding me! that thing has better graphics and sound than the SNES, and it came out 5-6 years before that! unreal!" becuase up to that point, I thought computers in the 80's were what the IBM PC was, and nothing more. it was indeed way ahead of it's time. But like I said earlier, I feel safer not owning a computer that is made, and sold by one company, becuase well, commodore gave up it's technological lead by being stupid, and went bankrupt, and when that happens, you have no more support, and your hardware, and OS become door stops.
Joey JoeJoe Jr Shabadoo Yes, it was a really great piece of kit. It really was. Have a look at preceding 8-bit machines such as the Commodore 64, Sinclair ZX Spectrum, BBC Micro, Oric 1, Atari 800XL.... you'll be amazed at what developers squeezed out of such humble hardware. The thing is, at that time IBM PC's were serious money and for 'businesses only' - so all home computers were made by a company: Sinclair, Commodore, Oric, Atari.... it mattered not. You got the machine you wanted. I had a ZX Spectrum then moved on to the Amiga as the 16-bit reign began. Kudos to the Atari ST too - but the Amiga was supreme. Back then the thought of 'no Commodore' was unthinkable.
There was never even a comparison. Amiga dominated. I'm still baffled as to how Commodore lost the computer wars. Apple was crap, Microsoft was crap. Had to be a management issue. Amiga never committed itself to a solid word processing program or a business friendly platform. Big mistake. I'm amazed that Nintendo is still alive. But they are purely gaming. Commodore wanted to act like they could have both like Apple and PC has today, but never developed a solid business machine. Poor management.
Try running the games on a 7mhz cpu 1mb ram PC that costed the same as an Amiga at the time these games were released for a more accurate comparison...
irony btw
I like this video: is useful to emphasize the differences between them, and the monstruous delay of PC to be competitive than Amiga! I want to remember to all who don't know: with Amiga, don't need graphics schede, sound schede, joystick-port, it's all 'ready to use'! Long live to Amiga fan!!
i never unterstood why people did play on PC. Games looked horrible and the speaker sound was painful
+Gernot Schrader Had an A2000 and i bought a A1200 when it came out although the Amiga was dying this time. But Wing Comnander and Doom killed the Amiga finally. Then i bought an 486 DX2 66 and it was a good gaming machine with VGA and Soundblaster. I was glad i didnt have to play with cga/ega and PC speaker.
People working on PC, and play in free time in work.
Old games were really crap in PC. Amiga computers are really good at graphics processing and audio quality. But when games like Doom come the things changed...
@@juniorsilvabroadcast bad games on the PC changed in the early 90's. And the PC changed it all forever, until today. There's nothing better than a PC when it comes to play games!
@@pauloteixeira8269 remember amiga started it
Strange, I read a book on the history of computers a few weeks ago and there was no mention of the Amiga. It was as if it never existed. It was a major threat to other manufacturers, as the operating system was so efficient. The Amiga was the world's first affordable multimedia, multitasking personal computer, the AmigaOS could operate fully and multitask in as little as 250K of memory, try that on a PC.....
Any questions? Amiga Rulez forever!!!
The Amiga was so advanced for its time, and it cost much less than an IBM PC too. You could get the Amiga and the attachment that let you run MS DOS programs for less than an IBM PC. What an incredible machine.
Good to see the pc owned, even back then.
Umm... What are you talking about? Did you even watch the video? The Amiga had better graphics, better sound, and better... Well... Everything when it comes to gaming. The DOS was shit compared to the Amiga. It's like comparing an NES to a SNES.
Nejo Goldsmith
That was until the 386-DX processors and VGA 256 colour standard and 32-bit wavetable soundcards. In other words, until around 1992/3. Then the Amiga got banged the fuck out of the ring and into the Hall Of Fame of Hasbeens.
Did you even play Dune 2 on the Amiga? How about UFO Enemy Unknown? Wolfenstein 3D? What about Alone In The Dark ... oh sorry, they scrapped the port because the Amiga was too weak. It was goodnight thanks for coming to the inferior Amiga and thank fuck for that! My wrist was almost broken with all that disc swapping...
TheVanillatech True. But definitely not before 1992. Before PC started using VGA graphics, the Amiga owned it.
Nejo Goldsmith
Yes but like I said, the Amiga was built as a home entertainment system from the A500 onwards. The PC was not. It wasn't until the corporations realised the potential untapped market as millions of households now owned a PC that the power started to shift. The 386-DX and early 486 machines had enough grunt to dominate the entire gaming industry as the premier platform, and VGA 256-colour along with the PC's modable configurations and standards such as VESA and DOS spelled "game over" for the Amiga.
Pre 1992, I would have preferred my Amiga over my Megadrive, Atari-ST and most certainly over my 16-colour EGA 286 PC. But then I got a 486-sx33 in 1993 and played Doom. And the rest is history...
*****
Yeah probably the bare minimum system that could even run Doom, but the "F5" low detail function (think it doubled the pixels) came in handy on the low end PC's. Still looked amazing, even running in low detail on a 25Mhz 386! XD
The Amiga was a games machine that could also do your taxes. The PC was a spreadsheet machine that could be coerced, with considerable DOS configuration skills and many pieces of extra hardware, to play a game.
A minor issue is that you're showing mostly games from a time when the Amiga had the better hardware for gaming, Deathsword especially. Both systems have been around for a very long time, and there are plenty of PC games that could blow the Amiga out of the water once VGA cards and things like the Adlib and Soundblaster happened like Stunts, Daggerfall, Quake, Bioforge, Corncob 3d, Doom, Comanche: Maximum Overkill, Magic Carpet, the list goes on. Both systems had their heyday.
You talking about games long after the Amiga golden age. Not many people really had Amiga 4000's by then as it was all 486 pc's.
The Amiga also cost 1/3 of what a PC cost back then too. Not that the Amiga was cheap though, it was £400 in the UK on 1992 when I got mine, which is £750 in todays money when adjusted for inflation. But the cheapest, bare bones entry level PC in 1992 cost at least £1000, and you'd have to lay out over £1200 for one that was capable of games. The PC came with a monitor and the Amiga was connected to a TV, but that PC would cost £2,250 in todays money. I still remember when my uncle bought a top of the range PC in 1993 that cost enough to buy a family car. Friends and neighbours came round to just stare at it, like it had beamed in from future. They were all so impressed and he was so proud, but unfortunately his day was ruined by the tactless 13 year old me saying "It only does SIXTEEN colours? Seriously? My Amiga does over four thousand. Whats that buzzing and beeping noise, wheres the music? What, it cant do music?!?! NO way! How much did this cost? Waaaahhhahahahahahaha!" It was years and years before using a PC didnt feel a massive step down from using an Amiga
You should have just called this CGA games vs Amiga games. Of course the Amiga wins. #Amigafanboys
amiga was far better than atari as well 😉
+Albert Fuentes (Hankillo) Nope
+tosgem Leave the Amiga alone atarifanboy
+Albert Fuentes (Hankillo) Nope
+tosgem take your falcon and throw it to the garbage, is the best thing you can do
Polish rhyme: "Amigowcu nie rżnij głupa, Doom nie chodzi no i dupa"
"Amiga-boy don't be stupid, Doom not working, so suck",
in polish language it is pretty rhyme. :oD
Know what? Amiga is a fossil, PC is still evolving. And what's more? PC allows Amiga to be alive. ^^
It's like Jurassic Park but for the Amiga!
www.forbes.com/sites/marcochiappetta/2018/10/29/the-first-next-generation-68k-based-amiga-in-decades-booted-up-yesterday/?fbclid=IwAR3_BK026IW4UafG39KGJ92M0UCewN2UnwNmBD1Zb8FnpnfLsmPkBy5uu1o#43a313396d74
PC seems to be mostly CGA which was terrible. VGA was way, way better. Heck, even EGA was way better than CGA.
The Amiga was the superior being, Workbench was basically better than windows 3.1 and it was older, the games had better graphics for their time and the Super-AGA graphics were awesome for their time. PC was under and below anything.
The reason why PC got more attention than AMIGA is the same reason we are not using Tesla technology for energy consumption.
+Astro Monkey
the biggest problem was that commodore never tried to bring the amiga into offices "as a second source of income"
+Astro Monkey Well, amiga was better than PC when it first came out, but years after years, PC's expansion cards became better and better (cpu was already better, the 386 came out in 1985/1986 and had a minimum speed of 16mhz, was a 32bits architecture, etc).
PC wasn't made for gaming in the first place, so it had a very nice CPU for it's time, but it had no capabilities for graphism or sound. But it evolved constaintly and by 1987, it was ready for gaming (VGA and adlib cards were released that year). The fact that they were almost never used before let's say 1990, is that PC were still very expensive, so developpers didn't wanted to waste their time on something that almost nobody could use.
If you compare a later PC game that still can run on a 386 with it's amiga port, you'll see that the PC was in some ways superior/equal, but almost never used like so (adlib still lacked wave sound)
Also, AMIGA had a hardware accelerator since the begining, while PC got it only at the mid 90's (when nvidia, ati, S3, 3Dfx released their "3D" chipsets). There is almost no VGA hardware accelerator (except for some later revisions that brough "blitter", and some other stuff)
Even though the Amiga version of Stunt Car Racer looked better, it also gets a worse framerate. Not hating on the amiga, that thing was amazing for it's time.
It is important to say that the DOS version of the games you're presenting are most of them EGA (16 colors) and CGA (4 colors), not the VGA versions.
Try to compare Gobliiins, The Secret of Monkey Island 1 and 2, Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, Elvira 1 and 2, Waxworks, Beneath a Steel Sky, etc, and you'll see the differences between AMIGA and a REAL PC version :)
This comparison should have been done differently, comparing games with similar feature: sound cards and graphic cards.
That was kind of the point though, PCs eventually passed machines like the Amiga, but for their time both the Atari ST and Amiga kicked the shit out of their competition. It just couldn't be kept up, and as we all know Apple was the only one of these more locked down computers to survive.. for whatever reason...
Dylan Collins In those old days, PC developers were also a bit lazy to make games for the PC. It kinda reminds me what happened with ZX Spectrum and C64 machines. :)
That's also very true, the specialized hardware of systems like the Amiga made it easy to optimize the game like you would on a console, while the PC got what often appeared to be a hack job version of the game. At least this didn't last though. By the 90s the PC was arguably the dominate game machine.
Can remember buying PC version of Boulder Dash and playing under emulation on Amiga. Back in the day. Kind of even found the Spectrum version had more bling. :) I think they even fitted it into 30-40k. :)
Unfortunately the amiga didnt have the same upgrade path like the IBM PC did, thats what killed it off.
PC not much to hang in the christmas tree, Amiga still beats PC
I had a PC and played in DOS. Some of my mates had AMIGA (NEMIGA). Most of the time I played different games on the two different machines. However. Somewhere around 1990 I tried North and South on AMIGA. It was way better than PC version. I always knew PC would pass AMIGA and make it useless in a few years.
The comparision of Barbarian on PC and AMIGA showed a ridculous big difference. I hated the CGA graphics from the beginning, but soon EGA and VGA came. And we dreamt of SVGA. The sound was no highlight either, but I played many games without sound (like CM1). When it came to Ports of Call I preferred it on PC. Better than AMIGA.
While the PC obviously passed the Amiga eventually, it doesn't change though that for years it was an amazing machine that pretty much blew everything else out of the water. It was a marvelously advanced machine for its time, it's just a shame they couldn't keep it up with later releases. By the time they were releasing the Amiga 4000 it was nothing but a shell of what was once a great name.
I'm sorry to disappoint you but EGA was 16 colors only, 256 colors came with VGA which as far as I know only became widespread in the early 90's, same goes for the the Soundblaster (before which the PC simply could not compete with the Amiga audio-wise). Both VGA and Soundblaster were technically created in the late 80's but the fact that games really making use of VGA and Soundblaster became the standard in like 1993 means more than when the hardware was produced.
That's all true. :)
But, the natural course of the computers soon defined a winner: the PC.
Anyway, Amiga still is a mark for what it was in its time, like the ZX Spectrum was with all its limitations. :)
@electrictroy2010
Most PC games in early 90s supported Roland MT-32/LAPC-1, so if you were fortunate enough to own one (yes they were expensive, but so what :) ), you'd enjoy game music which was superior that you'd get on Amiga games. Search with the keyword MT-32 in TH-cam.
If you had only a lowend Adlib or Soundblaster card, then yes they normally sounded quite tinny compared to the (IMHO scratchy) Amiga music.
True... but Creative Labs presented great sound cards in the very first years of the 90's, like the PRO and PRO2 and AWE cards, which were just AWEsome!
the first game looks like resident evil
No contest. Amiga WINS!
Amiga sound and graphics chips were incredible. For a long while the only thing PC manged to do better was polygonal 3D
Im telling you that amiga is better
Commodore = made perfect from day 1.. Microsoft = what do I need to buy now to make this game work, what does this say "new firmware available please download"... WTF?
Pls compare if exist VGA version and sounblaster not CGA PC Speaker. For example the Winter game have VGA and soundblaster version, so it is not fair.
That's why I said comparisons should be done equally. VGA-VGA, not VGA-CGA, for example.
The more or less IBM compatible PC was crap back then. It was the fake idea of buying a PC once and being able to bring it up to date forever with the latest hardware that brought the dead to Atari and Commodore.
I have said many times myself that the PC "standards" and "compatibilities" meant nothing. It was marketing of those lies that had ppl believe in them.
Very nicely done. I miss my Amiga so much. :( Used to play Stunt Car Racer on my Amiga quite a bit. It had a split screen multiplayer mode as well that was fun.
I never knew Gremlin used the same music in Lotus as for ZOOL.
What a rip :D
Stick a soundblaster in, or perhaps an OPL3-based soundcard and you'd immediately supersede the Amiga
@matthehat Yes, and that was possible in the very early years of the 90's. :)
This made me smile. Good ol'Amiga.
Where is Civilization? Amiga must have extremally konfiguration with AGA, to reach graphic compare to PC 286.
The Amiga when it was released in 1987 was ahead of its time!
1985
omg, the music from Lost Patrol... i still love it :D
@scarybozo
If that is the case, it's due to bad research on my side, definitely not intentional.
Could you (or anyone else) link me to EGA screenshots of the games in question?
There are two games called Barbarian, and they're very different - the one in this video also known as "Death Sword"... just so no one links to the wrong game.
One thing I did mess up with though is - the ugly pink CGA palette is incorrect, it's what you get on modern cards.
PCs were pretty much crap in regards to gaming until they started coming with 486s. And even then "multimedia" PCs with the necessary graphics and sound cards weren't the majority of those at first. Those that had the ability were a lot more expensive than the Amiga when new. The only downside that I remember of my Amiga 500 was needing a finicky side-slot for extra RAM and the fact the timing of when I got it was on the tail end of the U.S. software market supporting it.
500 letters are too little to describe my feelings right now! Oh you woken up some memories dude! Thanks for this video!
Amiga was much better than PCs for many years. Still it died. If the Amiga had advanced, instead of the PC, we would have much better machines now.
Anyway, VGA did miracles for the PC. I won't forget the war against the Amiga from the adventure games making companies.
As for the sound, which seems to be the main focus of this video, well, PAULA rules, plain and simple! ;)
Keen 4 & 5 had much worse graphics than several Amiga games released earlier.
Shadow of the Beast had 32 color graphics with 13 layers of parallax scrolling, and it was released earlier than Keen 4&5, which had 16 color graphics and one layer of parallax? I can't remember exactly but I don't think it had more than that. And the sound was also much worse than in Beast.
Back in the day I was a Dos user and I will say that I lived in envy over the amiga games.Pretty much ever game looked better on the amiga not to mention scrolled 100x smoother.Yes over time the pc surpassed the amiga but for years the amiga had the definitive versions of many games.
You're exaggerating. I had a stock A500 too and it wasn't that bad. Maybe it's because I used to have a C64 before that. People today are too impatient! :D
And as I said, most big games were hard drive installable, so if you'd gotten one of those, you could've played a lot of games off of that.
People also are forgetting how much MORE EXPENSIVE the PCs cost than an Amiga.
I remember seeing Defender Of The Crown on Amiga, and it was the first time I'd seen a "movie-style" game like what we have today. There were finally enough colors to *fade* the credits in and out, etc.
When PC games used EGA graphics, games were more often than not better looking on the Amiga.
Later on, when PCs got VGA graphics, graphics were often better on PC (well, more colors anyway).. however, not always! And the scrolling etc was still pretty bad on PCs.
That depends on how many colors were used. If it's an older PC game using EGA graphics, you could port the graphics directly over but it would be ugly by Amiga standards.
If it's a newer PC game in 256 colors, the graphics have to be redrawn in less colors unless you were porting it to an AGA Amiga.
Commander Keen had 16 color EGA graphics and adlib sound.. even if you used a Soundblaster card. It's not very impressive technically (well it might have been for PCs at the time) but they're very cool games though!
And you're right about Marble Madness, has bugged me ever since I uploaded the video.
The Amiga 500 was released in 1987. Is it propaganda to show games that are close to that date?
Putting Mortal Kombat in there would be ridiculous, that game was released in 1993! The Amiga was released in 1987!
And Monkey Island 1 is better on the Amiga, the music is far better.
this video was made with amiga'fanaticism...this is not real...if you compare games like oscar or mortal kombat 1 or 2 or monkey island 1 or 2..you will see that PC'versions are better
so...this is pure propaganda..and you have compared amiga games vs EGA games and not vs VGA games
I don't get it. why are you comparing CGA graphics machine for office works (there were available VGA and earlier PGA (1984 yr) cards at that time and sound blasters with 8bit digitzed voice since 1988) with home computer designed for entertainment?
It was *very* expensive and I'm not sure if games supported it right away either. And those cards did not have the same silky smooth scrolling as Amiga had. I'd like to see a game running at 50 FPS with 13 layers of parallax scrolling on a 1988 PC :D
I think the Amiga music is nicer than the CD version music. And besides, there's nothing impressive about a computer playing CD audio - if I had included Monkey Island, I would have used the regular soundcard version.
Sierra did some of the worst Amiga ports I have ever seen... not only when it comes to graphics, but also optimization... they're such incredibly lazy ports, check out Space Quest 4 for a good example!
@Koomeet30 I'm sorry but was better, i'm a AMIGA fan but i can't have a computer only for games :) i tried new amiga OS but for internet you don't have support one for all : FLASH 4exampl.
Yeah true.. but the result would most often be better if the graphics were partly or completely redrawn. If you want a horror example of bad downscaling, take a look at my Space Quest 4 for Amiga longplay.
God, I didn't think the Amiga had this much of a gap over the PC back then, makes me laugh and cry that Amiga pretty much stayed still in development and PC just kept advancing.
It's not my fault PCs didn't support VGA and soundblaster when the Amiga was released ;)
I might make one more with more modern DOS games but that is pretty unfair towards the Amiga.
Yeah, early DOS games were pretty bad a lot of the time. I used many old games in this video to show how big the difference was near the time the Amiga was originally released (1987).
I showed early games on purpose as I think that is more fair. The Amiga 500 was released in 1987, so I'm obviously going to show games as close to that as possible.
Yes, I agree. Finally someone who thinks this is not fair towards the Amiga.. most people complain that I'm making Amiga propaganda and not being fair towards the PC :o
Actually "Marble Madness" PC can be run in Tandy mode, which makes it look / sound a bit better. Great video, though.
@HardWarUK
OK, but google it and you'll find you're wrong about this.
Are you living in the US, maybe? The Amiga was much, much less popular there.
Says on Wikipedia that VGA came out in 1988 but Wikipedia can very well be wrong.
However, there were incredibly few VGA games until a few years later.
Which games are those? I used whatever soundcard that was supported by the various games and only used PC speaker when nothing else was available.
@HardWarUK
You don't seem to know much about the Amiga at all, 500 games?? Where did you get that from? In any case, it's very much incorrect.
PLZ make a top 20 PC games from 90's :D