yeah, I knew ONE kid with a C64 in our year at school.
His parents were well off, naturally (well off compared to 95% of the kids that lived in the council estate)
There were a few kids with BBCs and Electrons. Parents were middle ish class, and wanted an educational computer.
Everybody else, whose parents could afford a computer, had spectrums.
The kid with the C64 was alright - he brought it round at night. It was amazing. The thing that I really remembered, was not so much the sound, but was that the skin of the characters on screen was skin coloured. And it could display orange - orange! To me, that was incredible. Arcade games used skin coloured sprites, and displayed orange. Everything on my spectum was magenta or cyan (normally just one or the other). I remember the graphics in ZZap looking like photographs: things were the same colour as they were in reality. Then I saw a crash review of the NES, and that was, effectively, the end of the spectrum for me.
The spectrum was an amazing little computer, and some of my favourite games ever are for it: atic atak, sabre wulf, LOM; but back in 85, I would have swapped it for a C64 in a heartbeat!
I nearly buggered mine up on my +2 as a kid trying to get a copied version of Outrun to load. I was scared! sweating, everything. Eventually I managed to get the loading sound again!
Maybe some came with one, or perhaps it was the +2A? Anyway, I had to drill an artificial hole where the screw was by using a screwdriver! Defo none of them had a tapecounter though.
yeah, I knew ONE kid with a C64 in our year at school.
His parents were well off, naturally (well off compared to 95% of the kids that lived in the council estate)
There were a few kids with BBCs and Electrons. Parents were middle ish class, and wanted an educational computer.
Everybody else, whose parents could afford a computer, had spectrums.
The kid with the C64 was alright - he brought it round at night. It was amazing. The thing that I really remembered, was not so much the sound, but was that the skin of the characters on screen was skin coloured. And it could display orange - orange! To me, that was incredible. Arcade games used skin coloured sprites, and displayed orange. Everything on my spectum was magenta or cyan (normally just one or the other). I remember the graphics in ZZap looking like photographs: things were the same colour as they were in reality. Then I saw a crash review of the NES, and that was, effectively, the end of the spectrum for me.
The spectrum was an amazing little computer, and some of my favourite games ever are for it: atic atak, sabre wulf, LOM; but back in 85, I would have swapped it for a C64 in a heartbeat!
Yep, no-one at our school apart from one kid had a C64. Not because they weren't any good, but because they were simply too expensive. Strangely there were two kids with Atari computers. Great machine the 800XL.
For those who can't be bothered clicking, my opening post says the following:
On technical grounds alone, the C64 version is way ahead of the Speccy. Full screen scrolling, multichannel music, more colour, and faster gameplay. However, some of these technical pluses have in my opinion created gameplay minuses. First of all, C64 Uridium, in spite of its fab sound fx, has less atmosphere because of the colour schemes: the Super Dreadnoughts just don't look metallic, and the pastel colours don't give the impression of outer space at all. The spectrum's cool monochrome is absolutely perfect for this type of setting, and the not-quite-smooth scroll gives it a cinematic feel.
The biggest problem I have though is with avoiding the obstacles. On the Spectrum, the scrolling is slower, so you have more reaction time to avoid the barriers. Because your ship is always in the middle of the screen rather than the left hand side like most side-scrollers, you have very little to see in front of you. With the C64 version, it moves so quickly you have almost no chance of avoiding them at times unless you memorise everything beforehand. The worst example is on Level 2 (Lead). The ground is dark and the barriers are black, and when you move quickly, you can barely tell the bloody difference! Result? Screams of frustration. The Spectrum version strangely enough, despite the monochrome, has more easily defined graphics, and this problem doesn't arise.
Another thing I don't like is the C64 end level Dreadnought destruction sequence and bonus round. They impede the gameplay's flow, and had me shouting "hurry up!" when I had completed the early levels. I would have taken them out and used the extra memory for something else within the main game, rather than as a dull intermission.
In saying all that, the fx on C64 Uridium are great, and would have worked well on the Spectrum version.
So there it is kids: Uridium, one of the most famous games on the C64, is actually better on the Spectrum! Well okay, maybe it isn't, but I preferred it anyway, and let's face it, what I think is all that matters :grin:
I still agree with all that, so SPECTRUM IS THE WINNER!!!
1980s Britons were very much clued-up on what they wanted to buy, regardless of price. First and foremost was the quality of the games. Remember, this is what was always discussed. Most families wanted continuous support of quality software.
"Well Peter, the Spectrum has all the best games. The Dragon, C64, and Atari 800 have nothing."
"Lets go for Spectrum then!"
And that was that. And as a bonus, it was cheap! Fantastic.
And yes, agreed that Spectrum Uridium is much more cinematic.
1980s Britons were very much clued-up on what they wanted to buy, regardless of price..
I don't think you have a very good memory of the early 80s... The early 80s was a time of terrible recession and historically high unemployment, it was a time of social unrest (riots, protests)....
.....or you were lucky enough to come from a family that had a choice of purchase, regardless of price.
It certainly wasn't like that where I grew up! We didn't have a car, a telephone, a washing machine (my mum used to wash the clothes in the bath); we didn't have holidays (a holiday was a week at gran's house in Maryhill, the first holiday I had was when I was 17). And we were one of the better off families: some of my mates had literally, nothing. The poverty in working class Britain in the early 80s was, looking back, astounding.
A sinclar spectrum was more than a week's wages for most working class families. Spending that sort of money on a single purchase was a BIG deal.
I don't remember the C64 being anywhere near twice the price of the +2 or +3. Maybe at launch. I could never understand why Sinclair didn't produce a dedicated datacorder like commodore did.
Using standard mono tape recorders makes a lot of sense actually.
A) Cheaper, remember Clive's main mantra was reducing costs and a quite a few households already had a tape recorder.
B) Very easy to set up and adjust for computer use. Get a precision screwdriver and turn the head adjustment screw until the sound is as loud as possible.
That was one of the things that I could never understand at the time. Commodore produced two versions of the C2N datasette, the brick-sized one originally for the VIC-20 and the smaller soapdish sized one. The brick one was literally built like one and very reliable and apparently set-up correctly at the factory. The soapdish was a cost reduced version and clearly was not set-up properly. The guy who ran the computer shop bitd, would use a tape head set-up program for the C64 and would do this several times on a saturday easily.
Speed and smooth animation defines Uridium.
That's why the best Uridium versions are the fastest ones for C64, MSX, BBC.
Quite difficult to play, not my favorite, but its Uridium - Andrew Braybrook masterpiece.
C64 has plenty of Uridium clones, some pretty good ones Dolphin Force, Counter Force ...
Here's how should it look like a worthy Spectrum version..
Unfortunately because of its limited graphics, there was no other choice, so we got slow monochrome, beep version ... highly cinematic.. ;)
Using standard mono tape recorders makes a lot of sense actually.
A) Cheaper, remember Clive's main mantra was reducing costs and a quite a few households already had a tape recorder.
B) Very easy to set up and adjust for computer use. Get a precision screwdriver and turn the head adjustment screw until the sound is as loud as possible.
That was one of the things that I could never understand at the time. Commodore produced two versions of the C2N datasette, the brick-sized one originally for the VIC-20 and the smaller soapdish sized one. The brick one was literally built like one and very reliable and apparently set-up correctly at the factory. The soapdish was a cost reduced version and clearly was not set-up properly. The guy who ran the computer shop bitd, would use a tape head set-up program for the C64 and would do this several times on a saturday easily.
More likely Sinclair didn't want a backlog of faulty tape recorders to repair. Remember - unlike Commodore, Sinclair's quality control and returns rate was pretty atrocious in the early days of the Spectrum.
I agree. I had a Speccy back in the day and I do prefer that most of the games are not as blocky as a lot of the C64 games. But saying that the Speccy scrolling in Uridium, which is slower and not as smooth as the C64 version gives it a "cinematic feel" is insane. I love the Spectrum and that is what I had BITD but there are plenty of great games on the C64 as well and many of them are better than than than the Speccy version and vice/versa.
I am afraid a few of my Speccy colleagues are heavily biased and a few of their arguments are quite insane. Totally blinkered and in denial.
I wouldn't say "more cinematic" but the scrolling in Uridium on the 64 is definitely too fast and does negatively affect the game play. It would have worked better if the ship had stayed near the back of the screen. The dreadnoughts also lack a sense of depth which makes it difficult to tell what you're going to hit and what you can safely fly over (I'm not convinced the Speccy version fixes that either). The homing baddies really upset the balance too, because pretty much your only chance there is to fly away at full speed and that's pretty much an inevitable collision.
And, honestly, is there anybody willing to genuinely argue that the choice of colours on the player and enemy sprites wasn't awful? They were classic "programmer" graphics at best.
At the end of the day the game play of Uridium is not great on any version. They all suffer from not being able to identify what you can and can not fly over, among other things. The C64 one looks, sounds and moves better, but the game play is still flawed no matter what version is played. It is impressive that the Speccy achieved what it did with the game, but to me the C64 is the better version of a flawed game. Even if you convince yourself that the Speccy graphics are better, the C64 still sounds and moves way better.
Now the whole Paradroid vs. Quazatron debate... I will side with the Speccy game every time. The C64 graphics are bland and boring. Even the sound is uninspiring. The Speccy game looks nicer and has more to the game with the ability to salvage individual components from robots. Even the sound is good for a Speccy game. The only flaw of the Spectrum version is the jerky scrolling, but it really does not impact game play.
I agree. I had a Speccy back in the day and I do prefer that most of the games are not as blocky as a lot of the C64 games. But saying that the Speccy scrolling in Uridium, which is slower and not as smooth as the C64 version gives it a "cinematic feel" is insane. I love the Spectrum and that is what I had BITD but there are plenty of great games on the C64 as well and many of them are better than than than the Speccy version and vice/versa.
I am afraid a few of my Speccy colleagues are heavily biased and a few of their arguments are quite insane. Totally blinkered and in denial.
Exactly.
After all, It may not be a perfect, but the C64 version still inspires people. :)
More likely Sinclair didn't want a backlog of faulty tape recorders to repair. Remember - unlike Commodore, Sinclair's quality control and returns rate was pretty atrocious in the early days of the Spectrum.
*edit To be fair Commodore's Quality Control regarding the soapdish C2N wasn't much better either.
I don't think you have a very good memory of the early 80s... The early 80s was a time of terrible recession and historically high unemployment, it was a time of social unrest (riots, protests)....
It's your memory that's fallible. I didn't give a resume of how I saw the social climate. ;)
In this country we were in the midst of the microchip revolution, which was powerful enough to negate the worries of recession. It was huge. The computer was a big deal. Holidays, phones or not, if you were a family who craved modern entertainment, you just *had* to get a home micro. It had to be something with longevity and be cutting edge, showcasing the best of the modern world of games. For those who did their homework, the Spectrum was the natural choice. Manic Miner, Arcadia, Valhalla, The Hobbit, Chuckie Egg. All these games were widely advertised and discussed at length. It was the machine with ALL the games, and they looked brilliant. Spectrum users were also very vocal (really? - Ed) and quickly fuelled the excitement. Its no surprise that all the other micros were drowned in the Speccy's wake. If you hadn't done your homework, then you'd be left with an Acorn or Dragon 32. Not a terrible thing really, but if you wanted to keep up with the Joneses, then you'd certainly be hinting for a Speccy-Christmas before long.
Yes, the BBC was considered fairly expensive for many families down South, but still, playground disputes were split between these two machines. From the people I have spoken to, it wasn't a case of coming from a working or middle class family. It was whether they were clued up on what the games were like.
History of computers has been skewed by people assuming that economic struggle and price of machines dictated the choice. In this case it didn't, not in the South anyway.
I am afraid a few of my Speccy colleagues are heavily biased and a few of their arguments are quite insane. Totally blinkered and in denial.
The problem is that the Commode brigade seem to be trying to make claims about the C64, that because, "this is faster" or that, "this isn't monochrome" means that it's better, as in a statement of fact. That's ludicrous. Everything I've stated is a personal opinion. My opinion, shared by others. Never do I state that my preference to Spectrum Uridium is the be-all-and-end-all. It's certainly not blinkered. It's personal, and you'd have to be blinkered yourself to assume otherwise. Do I prefer Banksy or Rembrandt? Star Trek or Doctor Who? The C64 folk would probably say there's only one answer there as well. They'd be wrong.
It's your memory that's fallible. I didn't give a resume of how I saw the social climate. ;)
In this country we were in the midst of the microchip revolution, which was powerful enough to negate the worries of recession. It was huge. The computer was a big deal. Holidays, phones or not, if you were a family who craved modern entertainment, you just *had* to get a home micro. It had to be something with longevity and be cutting edge, showcasing the best of the modern world of games. For those who did their homework, the Spectrum was the natural choice. Manic Miner, Arcadia, Valhalla, The Hobbit, Chuckie Egg. All these games were widely advertised and discussed at length. It was the machine with ALL the games, and they looked brilliant. Spectrum users were also very vocal (really? - Ed) and quickly fuelled the excitement. Its no surprise that all the other micros were drowned in the Speccy's wake. If you hadn't done your homework, then you'd be left with an Acorn or Dragon 32. Not a terrible thing really, but if you wanted to keep up with the Joneses, then you'd certainly be hinting for a Speccy-Christmas before long.
Yes, the BBC was considered fairly expensive for many families down South, but still, playground disputes were split between these two machines. From the people I have spoken to, it wasn't a case of coming from a working or middle class family. It was whether they were clued up on what the games were like.
History of computers has been skewed by people assuming that economic struggle and price of machines dictated the choice. In this case it didn't, not in the South anyway.
So, you say it's only a coincidence then, that the only countries where the spectrum sold more than the c64 were poor countries? Russia, England (at the time).
So, you say it's only a coincidence then, that the only countries where the spectrum sold more than the c64 were poor countries? Russia, England (at the time).
In Russia it was clones that were sold. The C64 didn't sell well in the Eastern block because of its custom hardware and it couldn't be cloned.
Still, the point stands. To say that brits "chose cutting-edge technology" and the rest of the world didn't is just stupid. People in England bought spectrums because they were cheap and made by England's own boy. That got the ball rolling. No kid would ever have said: Oh, i got a spectrum because it was cheap, not because it has the best games. Me too tryed to convince my friends that was about to buy a computer that the spectrum was the right choice. Didn't really succeed there, and the c64 became "the computer of the republic"!
Me and my brother got a spectrum first, reason beacuse it was cheaper.
Me and my brother got a spectrum first, reason beacuse it was cheaper.
Of course thats the reason. Ive never read so much b@//@ck$ since Karl Pilkington asked me to proof read his latest theory :lol:
We were very poor. Had no car or phone. I only got a Speccy rather than a Zx81 due to my begging. I wanted some colour!
History of computers has been skewed by people assuming that economic struggle and price of machines dictated the choice. In this case it didn't, not in the South anyway.
Well in my part of the 'south' it did. If you were a kid from a working class family (as was I) - north or south of the country, you were more likely to get a Spectrum at xmas than a C64.
History of computers has been skewed by people assuming that economic struggle and price of machines dictated the choice. In this case it didn't, not in the South anyway.
History of the entire UK has been skewed by people in the "south" thinking what applied to them was universally true for the entire country. Just saying....
History of the entire UK has been skewed by people in the "south" thinking what applied to them was universally true for the entire country. Just saying....
No kid would ever have said: Oh, i got a spectrum because it was cheap, not because it has the best games.
Dunno about that. The fact that Spectrum games were cheaper than other formats was a major crowing point back in the day especially when you had to have a paper round and do odd jobs to buy the games...
Other formats were usually ?2 dearer, and that was a lot of money to a kid in the 80's.
Dunno about that. The fact that Spectrum games were cheaper than other formats was a major crowing point back in the day especially when you had to have a paper round and do odd jobs to buy the games...
Other formats were usually ?2 dearer, and that was a lot of money to a kid in the 80's.
I think Miner Willy is right here. In the School playground I am Pretty sure you would be told your computer's games were inferior if you drew attention to the price being cheaper, not to mention highly unfashionable to cite the cheaper cost of the machine.
Best option was to pretend all the Speccy games were better.
Some were better of course, but you'd have to have a heavy dose of denial or be a total crack-pot to deny all the C64's awesome software and abilities.
We are old now, we couldnt care less about things being cheap or our stuff having faults,, (or shouldn't anyway...)
We are old now, we couldnt care less about things being cheap or our stuff having faults,, (or shouldn't anyway...)
That's it. No amount of facts or figures that are screamed at my face of which computer is better is going to change my mind. In my mind the ZX Spectrum *is* the best as I grow up with it and loved it. I was never closed minded enough back then in that I was always curious how games looked on other machines. Nowadays, I know that each machine had its strengths and weaknesses but it's not going to make me say "f**k me, I've been wrong! My life has been a lie! The <insert computer here> was better!" Especially these days when I actively promote the Spectrum in my graphic design (as a priority, though I promote all retro stuff....except the Amstrad - that can go and f**k itself) and this thread (or any other) is certainly not going to change my mind.
A genuine question - what are those people who push for 1 to be better than the other expect to achieve?
Comments
His parents were well off, naturally (well off compared to 95% of the kids that lived in the council estate)
There were a few kids with BBCs and Electrons. Parents were middle ish class, and wanted an educational computer.
Everybody else, whose parents could afford a computer, had spectrums.
The kid with the C64 was alright - he brought it round at night. It was amazing. The thing that I really remembered, was not so much the sound, but was that the skin of the characters on screen was skin coloured. And it could display orange - orange! To me, that was incredible. Arcade games used skin coloured sprites, and displayed orange. Everything on my spectum was magenta or cyan (normally just one or the other). I remember the graphics in ZZap looking like photographs: things were the same colour as they were in reality. Then I saw a crash review of the NES, and that was, effectively, the end of the spectrum for me.
The spectrum was an amazing little computer, and some of my favourite games ever are for it: atic atak, sabre wulf, LOM; but back in 85, I would have swapped it for a C64 in a heartbeat!
Maybe some came with one, or perhaps it was the +2A? Anyway, I had to drill an artificial hole where the screw was by using a screwdriver! Defo none of them had a tapecounter though.
Yep, no-one at our school apart from one kid had a C64. Not because they weren't any good, but because they were simply too expensive. Strangely there were two kids with Atari computers. Great machine the 800XL.
For those who can't be bothered clicking, my opening post says the following:
On technical grounds alone, the C64 version is way ahead of the Speccy. Full screen scrolling, multichannel music, more colour, and faster gameplay. However, some of these technical pluses have in my opinion created gameplay minuses. First of all, C64 Uridium, in spite of its fab sound fx, has less atmosphere because of the colour schemes: the Super Dreadnoughts just don't look metallic, and the pastel colours don't give the impression of outer space at all. The spectrum's cool monochrome is absolutely perfect for this type of setting, and the not-quite-smooth scroll gives it a cinematic feel.
The biggest problem I have though is with avoiding the obstacles. On the Spectrum, the scrolling is slower, so you have more reaction time to avoid the barriers. Because your ship is always in the middle of the screen rather than the left hand side like most side-scrollers, you have very little to see in front of you. With the C64 version, it moves so quickly you have almost no chance of avoiding them at times unless you memorise everything beforehand. The worst example is on Level 2 (Lead). The ground is dark and the barriers are black, and when you move quickly, you can barely tell the bloody difference! Result? Screams of frustration. The Spectrum version strangely enough, despite the monochrome, has more easily defined graphics, and this problem doesn't arise.
Another thing I don't like is the C64 end level Dreadnought destruction sequence and bonus round. They impede the gameplay's flow, and had me shouting "hurry up!" when I had completed the early levels. I would have taken them out and used the extra memory for something else within the main game, rather than as a dull intermission.
In saying all that, the fx on C64 Uridium are great, and would have worked well on the Spectrum version.
So there it is kids: Uridium, one of the most famous games on the C64, is actually better on the Spectrum! Well okay, maybe it isn't, but I preferred it anyway, and let's face it, what I think is all that matters :grin:
I still agree with all that, so SPECTRUM IS THE WINNER!!!
https://discordapp.com/invite/cZt59EQ
wtf...
"Well Peter, the Spectrum has all the best games. The Dragon, C64, and Atari 800 have nothing."
"Lets go for Spectrum then!"
And that was that. And as a bonus, it was cheap! Fantastic.
And yes, agreed that Spectrum Uridium is much more cinematic.
I don't think you have a very good memory of the early 80s... The early 80s was a time of terrible recession and historically high unemployment, it was a time of social unrest (riots, protests)....
.....or you were lucky enough to come from a family that had a choice of purchase, regardless of price.
It certainly wasn't like that where I grew up! We didn't have a car, a telephone, a washing machine (my mum used to wash the clothes in the bath); we didn't have holidays (a holiday was a week at gran's house in Maryhill, the first holiday I had was when I was 17). And we were one of the better off families: some of my mates had literally, nothing. The poverty in working class Britain in the early 80s was, looking back, astounding.
A sinclar spectrum was more than a week's wages for most working class families. Spending that sort of money on a single purchase was a BIG deal.
A) Cheaper, remember Clive's main mantra was reducing costs and a quite a few households already had a tape recorder.
B) Very easy to set up and adjust for computer use. Get a precision screwdriver and turn the head adjustment screw until the sound is as loud as possible.
That was one of the things that I could never understand at the time. Commodore produced two versions of the C2N datasette, the brick-sized one originally for the VIC-20 and the smaller soapdish sized one. The brick one was literally built like one and very reliable and apparently set-up correctly at the factory. The soapdish was a cost reduced version and clearly was not set-up properly. The guy who ran the computer shop bitd, would use a tape head set-up program for the C64 and would do this several times on a saturday easily.
That's why the best Uridium versions are the fastest ones for C64, MSX, BBC.
Quite difficult to play, not my favorite, but its Uridium - Andrew Braybrook masterpiece.
C64 has plenty of Uridium clones, some pretty good ones Dolphin Force, Counter Force ...
Here's how should it look like a worthy Spectrum version..
Unfortunately because of its limited graphics, there was no other choice, so we got slow monochrome, beep version ... highly cinematic.. ;)
http://zx-pk.ru/
More likely Sinclair didn't want a backlog of faulty tape recorders to repair. Remember - unlike Commodore, Sinclair's quality control and returns rate was pretty atrocious in the early days of the Spectrum.
I agree. I had a Speccy back in the day and I do prefer that most of the games are not as blocky as a lot of the C64 games. But saying that the Speccy scrolling in Uridium, which is slower and not as smooth as the C64 version gives it a "cinematic feel" is insane. I love the Spectrum and that is what I had BITD but there are plenty of great games on the C64 as well and many of them are better than than than the Speccy version and vice/versa.
I am afraid a few of my Speccy colleagues are heavily biased and a few of their arguments are quite insane. Totally blinkered and in denial.
And, honestly, is there anybody willing to genuinely argue that the choice of colours on the player and enemy sprites wasn't awful? They were classic "programmer" graphics at best.
Now the whole Paradroid vs. Quazatron debate... I will side with the Speccy game every time. The C64 graphics are bland and boring. Even the sound is uninspiring. The Speccy game looks nicer and has more to the game with the ability to salvage individual components from robots. Even the sound is good for a Speccy game. The only flaw of the Spectrum version is the jerky scrolling, but it really does not impact game play.
Exactly.
After all, It may not be a perfect, but the C64 version still inspires people. :)
http://zx-pk.ru/
In this country we were in the midst of the microchip revolution, which was powerful enough to negate the worries of recession. It was huge. The computer was a big deal. Holidays, phones or not, if you were a family who craved modern entertainment, you just *had* to get a home micro. It had to be something with longevity and be cutting edge, showcasing the best of the modern world of games. For those who did their homework, the Spectrum was the natural choice. Manic Miner, Arcadia, Valhalla, The Hobbit, Chuckie Egg. All these games were widely advertised and discussed at length. It was the machine with ALL the games, and they looked brilliant. Spectrum users were also very vocal (really? - Ed) and quickly fuelled the excitement. Its no surprise that all the other micros were drowned in the Speccy's wake. If you hadn't done your homework, then you'd be left with an Acorn or Dragon 32. Not a terrible thing really, but if you wanted to keep up with the Joneses, then you'd certainly be hinting for a Speccy-Christmas before long.
Yes, the BBC was considered fairly expensive for many families down South, but still, playground disputes were split between these two machines. From the people I have spoken to, it wasn't a case of coming from a working or middle class family. It was whether they were clued up on what the games were like.
History of computers has been skewed by people assuming that economic struggle and price of machines dictated the choice. In this case it didn't, not in the South anyway.
The problem is that the Commode brigade seem to be trying to make claims about the C64, that because, "this is faster" or that, "this isn't monochrome" means that it's better, as in a statement of fact. That's ludicrous. Everything I've stated is a personal opinion. My opinion, shared by others. Never do I state that my preference to Spectrum Uridium is the be-all-and-end-all. It's certainly not blinkered. It's personal, and you'd have to be blinkered yourself to assume otherwise. Do I prefer Banksy or Rembrandt? Star Trek or Doctor Who? The C64 folk would probably say there's only one answer there as well. They'd be wrong.
So, you say it's only a coincidence then, that the only countries where the spectrum sold more than the c64 were poor countries? Russia, England (at the time).
Me and my brother got a spectrum first, reason beacuse it was cheaper.
Of course thats the reason. Ive never read so much b@//@ck$ since Karl Pilkington asked me to proof read his latest theory :lol:
We were very poor. Had no car or phone. I only got a Speccy rather than a Zx81 due to my begging. I wanted some colour!
Well in my part of the 'south' it did. If you were a kid from a working class family (as was I) - north or south of the country, you were more likely to get a Spectrum at xmas than a C64.
History of the entire UK has been skewed by people in the "south" thinking what applied to them was universally true for the entire country. Just saying....
Precisely.
jesus wept.
What planet is Bognor on?
There was no microchip revolution. Our industrial heartland has been replaced by pound shops.
What did you type that last message in with then? I'd be reasonably confident that it was something with a microchip in it.
Dunno about that. The fact that Spectrum games were cheaper than other formats was a major crowing point back in the day especially when you had to have a paper round and do odd jobs to buy the games...
Other formats were usually ?2 dearer, and that was a lot of money to a kid in the 80's.
I think Miner Willy is right here. In the School playground I am Pretty sure you would be told your computer's games were inferior if you drew attention to the price being cheaper, not to mention highly unfashionable to cite the cheaper cost of the machine.
Best option was to pretend all the Speccy games were better.
Some were better of course, but you'd have to have a heavy dose of denial or be a total crack-pot to deny all the C64's awesome software and abilities.
We are old now, we couldnt care less about things being cheap or our stuff having faults,, (or shouldn't anyway...)
A genuine question - what are those people who push for 1 to be better than the other expect to achieve?