We all have computers capable of displaying photographic images now, we can look at anything we want (;-)), so why are so many of us here and elsewhere still interested in looking at new Speccy graphics?
Childhood nostalgia.
Those that were not there at the time dont give a ****...
Those that were not there at the time dont give a ****...
Some of the most prolific contributors to this site and the Spectrum scene were not born in the Spectrum era, nor had them as children.
The same is true of many limiting artforms.
Those that were not there at the time dont give a ****...
Apart from those that do give a ****. Including the emulator authors, programmers and hardware hackers here who were born long after the speccy was nailed to it's current perch. Don't make me embarrass you further by naming some of them.
Your (abundant and free-flowing) self-righteousness is very much misplaced.
Can I just pre-empt any embarrassment and state that I don't give any ****s about this argument at all...
The only reason for arguing about these machines at all is childhood nostalgia. They're clearly all equally crap for 2015 and which machine anyone happened to like best in the 80s is basically irrelevant :p
It's certainly not worth filling 28 pages with bickering :lol:
Weesam, you come across as someone with nothing but contempt for the Spectrum retro computing scene.
And all the people involved.
Btw: Weesam. Although your ignorance and rudeness has been an uncomfortable blight on this otherwise decent site, I have answered your question... again! If you can't see the answer this time, then kindly leave it alone. I accept that you are not socially qualified to integrate with people decently, and you need to realise this too. If you don't get it, then step back. Now already in this paragraph I've said it twice. Just for you. :)
We are all fooling ourselves if we think that because the spectrum had (generally) poorer graphics then it (generally) made up for it in gameplay. Its a fallacious argument (yeah, she ugly, but she's got a great personality)
No there are two things going on here. There is pixel resolution and colour resolution. It's clear you are quite happy with lower pixel resolution and higher colour resolution. But there are people who are not. It's not always the case that the combination low-res pixel + high res colour makes a visually better game, and quite often it will come down to what kind of game it is and some personal taste. It's very clear in this thread where Pegaz posted some videos of c64 and spectrum games side by side where I thought the spectrum version was the better game but he was using it as an example of the opposite. The one coming to mind is Batman which, last time I played on both machines 20+ years ago, I thought the spectrum version the better version.
The trend, and pressure, on video games, since their inception, was on increasing the visual and sonic quality. Every generation of machine has increased the potential in those areas (except the spectrum line, which doggedly stuck to its poor colour handling and limited graphics throughout the 80s).
Yes indeed. But you forget -- the c64 is *not* higher resolution pixel *and* higher resolution colour. The fact that it is slower and can't do much without its hardware means games sometimes have to compromise with size of play area, amount of action, definition of sprites in comparison to the spectrum. That can enter into the quality of the game. But I can see from your posts that you mainly care about one thing -- the visual stills seen in screenshots. Others may weigh other factors like smooth movement, detailed graphics and level of action into the quality of the game.
One recent post is talking about Green Beret. The spectrum version of Green Beret would be technically good on any 8-bit machine. The c64 version is good too but guess what? I like the spectrum version more than the c64 version and indeed more than the arcade. How did that happen?
One might ask why did people think "wow" when the spectrum came out, when they compared it to say, the ZX81? What was it about the spectrum that made the leap? I guess the clue is in the name of the computer.
Just as an aside, the zx81 is really great machine for hobbyists. It's very much underrated by owners of more expensive (and less capable!) machines like the trs-80, pet, etc because of its price and feeble package. Admittedly a keyboard is nice to have and rampack wobble is a problem but the machine itself is intriguing.
Here's a zx81 game in 256x192. Because the z80 is responsible for shifting the pixels out to the modulator, the zx81 is capable of 256x192 resolution:
Gameplay really is dictated a whole lot by about what the computer can display on the screen....At some point what is being displayed on the screen starts to dictate gameplay. It allows environments to be built, and the player to step into that environment. California games on the C64 - it was bursting with sunshine and colour, and felt like California
Yes it can. But other factors such as speed and detail also enter into the equation. When you hear how the c64 hardware causes compromises to be made in the puzzles seen in isometrics or the max number of sprites per line means the game doesn't move enemies lower until slots are available or the machine's hw can't support the game type so the play area is much reduced... even the most ardent fanboy has to acknowledge that can affect the game as well. How badly it is affected depends on the game and how hidden the limitations are from the player.
California Games, Summer Games, etc were all substandard conversions on the spectrum. Many c64 hits were not given the best treatment (and vice versa I'd imagine). Pointing this out does not mean "I have blinkers on" as you so like to toss at people who disagree with you.
So whilst it is easy to pick a crap C64 game like Cobra, don't point to the Spectrum version as something better. It's poor too: translucent colour clashing graphics, small repetitive play areas - but it was good for the spectrum
I'm not one of those 50fps or its unworthy people. It usually doesn't make much difference to the game unless you are watching a low resolution display on a large television.
With respect to all who doesn't agree, i think it's mostly nostalgic reasons too. There's bound to be exceptions ofcourse. And one little part of it they really don't make games like they did anymore. New games are made for old computers and people want to play them but i think thats mostly nostalgic too, too see what that "dear old machine" is now up to.
I had both spectrum and c64 as a kid, so that's why i'm mainly interested in those. I have went through most other 8-bits with emulators, and i even have a real NES with that powerpak cartridge. But apart from the obvious choices like the Mario games and Get Dexter those systems rarely hold my interest for very long.
Still, if i see a game on any other system that is better than what the c64 could do then i'm the first to say "that game is better than on the c64". That's why to me, Graz comes across as unnecessary stubborn. To hold every spectrum game as "better, or equally good on the spectrum". Yes, you want to play the spectrum versions. You like how they look, how they sound. But surely if you look on it from a technical point of view, there must have been games that were better on the c64. Where the smooth scrolling and hw sprites really made the game more fun and playable too?
I mentioned Space Hunter didn't I? How can honest preference, as wildly different to your own, be misconstrued as stubbornness? Especially after numerous explanations? Am I not willing to try Challenge of the Gobots and Wizzball?
Have you read anything on this thread or just jumped in? I like games on both computers, just a page or two back i said Manic Miner and Jet Set Willy is better on the spectrum! It's just that i'm not that blindfolded by 30 years of hate towards i computer i never got to see that the c64 is better in most ways!
"blindfolded by 30 years of hate"
Yes, that's really moderate, balanced talk isn't it! Even though I've only posted three times before on this thread, I've spent my last thirty years blinded by hate!
I mentioned Space Hunter didn't I? How can honest preference, as wildly different to your own, be misconstrued as stubbornness? Especially after numerous explanations? Am I not willing to try Challenge of the Gobots and Wizzball?
Let us know what you think when you have tryed them out! :-)
No there are two things going on here. There is pixel resolution and colour resolution. It's clear you are quite happy with lower pixel resolution and higher colour resolution. But there are people who are not. It's not always the case that the combination low-res pixel + high res colour makes a visually better game, and quite often it will come down to what kind of game it is and some personal taste. It's very clear in this thread where Pegaz posted some videos of c64 and spectrum games side by side where I thought the spectrum version was the better game but he was using it as an example of the opposite.
Yes indeed. But you forget -- the c64 is *not* higher resolution pixel *and* higher resolution colour.
I have already shown an example of games that goes beyond the Spectrum capabilities in all aspects (320x200 hires, fast, colourfull, no color clash, high quality sound effects), which says enough about the potential of the machine.
Even this kind of casual hires games, cant be replicated on Spectrum, because of color clash and mostly leads into monochrome:
So, C64 is quite capable for such games, they exist as well as the stunning combination of hires / multicolor, which we have seen in many examples here..
On the other hand, I'm still waiting to see 50fps smooth scrolling, quality Spectrum game..
One bare demo, after 30 years of existence, certainly isnt enough..
Here's a zx81 game in 256x192. Because the z80 is responsible for shifting the pixels out to the modulator, the zx81 is capable of 256x192 resolution
What exactly do you want to prove with this statement?
VIC 20 can produce a much higher resolution than Spectrum, which still doesnt mean it is better computer overal, although his certainly better in some areas..
Yes, that's really moderate, balanced talk isn't it! Even though I've only posted three times before on this thread, I've spent my last thirty years blinded by hate!
Well did you read the thread or not? Or just posted on that comment?
Can I just pre-empt any embarrassment and state that I don't give any ****s about this argument at all...
The only reason for arguing about these machines at all is childhood nostalgia. They're clearly all equally crap for 2015 and which machine anyone happened to like best in the 80s is basically irrelevant :p
It's certainly not worth filling 28 pages with bickering :lol:
I think most of us involved know that this argument is fundamentally silly (Don't we?). This was clearly signposted by Swainy in the very first post:
I'll make this my final contribution to the thread and take the opportunity now to extract myself from this maelstrom of 8-bit competitive madness!
To Team C64: it was fun bashing your fave machine, but hopefully there are no hard feelings! Despite their monstrous purple and brown shades, some of your games seem pretty good: Creatures 2 looks fun, and you've shown some impressive shooters such as Salamander, Armalyte and Enforcer - Fullmetal Megablaster.
Some of the most prolific contributors to this site and the Spectrum scene were not born in the Spectrum era, nor had them as children.
The same is true of many limiting artforms.
Weesam, you come across as someone with nothing but contempt for the Spectrum retro computing scene.
You are clearly uncomfortable with arguments that run counter to your view, so use emotive words like "contempt?; now you've started playing the man rather than the ball.
views about spectrum games on a forum thread about spectrum games are misplaced?:lol:
Why don't you stick to the subject?
I was assuming Chris was referring more to your judgements about the motivations of other people and the aggressive attitude which, intentionally or not, seems to exude from a lot of your posts.
I've been using the Speccy since 83. I've dabbled in Amstrad (had one, for about three weeks, in the early 90's) and have had a fair few 64's. For in my opinion, the Spectrum is easily the best machine. The C64 was brilliant, easily the best out of the three technically, and if you wanted to play shmups or RPG's (indeed, the 64 was my first introduction to computer role-playing-games) then it was the perfect 8-bit system. I won't mention the SID chip - it's excellence has been discussed plenty here already. The Amstrad tbh was a disappointment. It had the ability to produce brilliant graphics (even more so than the 64, certainly palette wise - it was incredibly close to a Master System in that respect) but it was bogged down early on by piss-poor straight conversions of Speccy games that didn't take advantage of the machine. To my mind, if you took the graphics of the Amstrad, the hardware, sound and expansion capabilities of the 64, and injected the sheer invention and love of the machine that the Spectrum community has had since it's creation, you'd have arguably one of the greatest computers ever made.
But, whenever I divert away from Speccy stuff (usually picking up 64 hardware) I always end up coming back to the Spectrum. I'm not techy, i'm not a programmer (I love doing Speccy gfx, more than any other machine, even if it comes to bugger all most of the time.) I couldn't even tell you what half the stuff inside it does, but 33 years on now, some of my favourite games of all time are on the machine, and still tons of brilliant new games are released.
Anyway, ignore, grumble, pull apart what i've said, whatever. It's ONLY an opinion :smile:
Comments
nice climbdown - an admission you were talking out of your hat?
Childhood nostalgia.
Those that were not there at the time dont give a ****...
Some of the most prolific contributors to this site and the Spectrum scene were not born in the Spectrum era, nor had them as children.
The same is true of many limiting artforms.
Weesam, you come across as someone with nothing but contempt for the Spectrum retro computing scene.
Your (abundant and free-flowing) self-righteousness is very much misplaced.
The only reason for arguing about these machines at all is childhood nostalgia. They're clearly all equally crap for 2015 and which machine anyone happened to like best in the 80s is basically irrelevant :p
It's certainly not worth filling 28 pages with bickering :lol:
And all the people involved.
Btw: Weesam. Although your ignorance and rudeness has been an uncomfortable blight on this otherwise decent site, I have answered your question... again! If you can't see the answer this time, then kindly leave it alone. I accept that you are not socially qualified to integrate with people decently, and you need to realise this too. If you don't get it, then step back. Now already in this paragraph I've said it twice. Just for you. :)
No there are two things going on here. There is pixel resolution and colour resolution. It's clear you are quite happy with lower pixel resolution and higher colour resolution. But there are people who are not. It's not always the case that the combination low-res pixel + high res colour makes a visually better game, and quite often it will come down to what kind of game it is and some personal taste. It's very clear in this thread where Pegaz posted some videos of c64 and spectrum games side by side where I thought the spectrum version was the better game but he was using it as an example of the opposite. The one coming to mind is Batman which, last time I played on both machines 20+ years ago, I thought the spectrum version the better version.
Yes indeed. But you forget -- the c64 is *not* higher resolution pixel *and* higher resolution colour. The fact that it is slower and can't do much without its hardware means games sometimes have to compromise with size of play area, amount of action, definition of sprites in comparison to the spectrum. That can enter into the quality of the game. But I can see from your posts that you mainly care about one thing -- the visual stills seen in screenshots. Others may weigh other factors like smooth movement, detailed graphics and level of action into the quality of the game.
One recent post is talking about Green Beret. The spectrum version of Green Beret would be technically good on any 8-bit machine. The c64 version is good too but guess what? I like the spectrum version more than the c64 version and indeed more than the arcade. How did that happen?
Just as an aside, the zx81 is really great machine for hobbyists. It's very much underrated by owners of more expensive (and less capable!) machines like the trs-80, pet, etc because of its price and feeble package. Admittedly a keyboard is nice to have and rampack wobble is a problem but the machine itself is intriguing.
Here's a zx81 game in 256x192. Because the z80 is responsible for shifting the pixels out to the modulator, the zx81 is capable of 256x192 resolution:
Yes it can. But other factors such as speed and detail also enter into the equation. When you hear how the c64 hardware causes compromises to be made in the puzzles seen in isometrics or the max number of sprites per line means the game doesn't move enemies lower until slots are available or the machine's hw can't support the game type so the play area is much reduced... even the most ardent fanboy has to acknowledge that can affect the game as well. How badly it is affected depends on the game and how hidden the limitations are from the player.
California Games, Summer Games, etc were all substandard conversions on the spectrum. Many c64 hits were not given the best treatment (and vice versa I'd imagine). Pointing this out does not mean "I have blinkers on" as you so like to toss at people who disagree with you.
I'm not one of those 50fps or its unworthy people. It usually doesn't make much difference to the game unless you are watching a low resolution display on a large television.
Write games in C using Z88DK and SP1
I had both spectrum and c64 as a kid, so that's why i'm mainly interested in those. I have went through most other 8-bits with emulators, and i even have a real NES with that powerpak cartridge. But apart from the obvious choices like the Mario games and Get Dexter those systems rarely hold my interest for very long.
Still, if i see a game on any other system that is better than what the c64 could do then i'm the first to say "that game is better than on the c64". That's why to me, Graz comes across as unnecessary stubborn. To hold every spectrum game as "better, or equally good on the spectrum". Yes, you want to play the spectrum versions. You like how they look, how they sound. But surely if you look on it from a technical point of view, there must have been games that were better on the c64. Where the smooth scrolling and hw sprites really made the game more fun and playable too?
"blindfolded by 30 years of hate"
Yes, that's really moderate, balanced talk isn't it! Even though I've only posted three times before on this thread, I've spent my last thirty years blinded by hate!
https://discordapp.com/invite/cZt59EQ
Let us know what you think when you have tryed them out! :-)
I have already shown an example of games that goes beyond the Spectrum capabilities in all aspects (320x200 hires, fast, colourfull, no color clash, high quality sound effects), which says enough about the potential of the machine.
Even this kind of casual hires games, cant be replicated on Spectrum, because of color clash and mostly leads into monochrome:
So, C64 is quite capable for such games, they exist as well as the stunning combination of hires / multicolor, which we have seen in many examples here..
On the other hand, I'm still waiting to see 50fps smooth scrolling, quality Spectrum game..
One bare demo, after 30 years of existence, certainly isnt enough..
What exactly do you want to prove with this statement?
VIC 20 can produce a much higher resolution than Spectrum, which still doesnt mean it is better computer overal, although his certainly better in some areas..
http://zx-pk.ru/
Well did you read the thread or not? Or just posted on that comment?
Fixed for weesam :-P
I think most of us involved know that this argument is fundamentally silly (Don't we?). This was clearly signposted by Swainy in the very first post:
Sorry Pegaz, but I think those first 2 games sum up the attitude of the average C64 fanboy, i.e.
"Why would I want to play monochrome Carrier Command, when I can play these nursery school games in FULL COLOUR!"
The cowboy game looks like the sort of thing the Spectrum could do a really nice job of reproducing.
To Team C64: it was fun bashing your fave machine, but hopefully there are no hard feelings! Despite their monstrous purple and brown shades, some of your games seem pretty good: Creatures 2 looks fun, and you've shown some impressive shooters such as Salamander, Armalyte and Enforcer - Fullmetal Megablaster.
Would look a lot better too, without all that ugly brown! ;-)
some?
or many?
You are clearly uncomfortable with arguments that run counter to your view, so use emotive words like "contempt?; now you've started playing the man rather than the ball.
Most people are, that's why it's called an argument and not a discussion :lol:
views about spectrum games on a forum thread about spectrum games are misplaced?:lol:
Why don't you stick to the subject?
anyone?
Some, like I say. I don't think saying 'many of the most prolific' would even make any sense.
I was assuming Chris was referring more to your judgements about the motivations of other people and the aggressive attitude which, intentionally or not, seems to exude from a lot of your posts.
Nah....Dacia :p
I've been using the Speccy since 83. I've dabbled in Amstrad (had one, for about three weeks, in the early 90's) and have had a fair few 64's. For in my opinion, the Spectrum is easily the best machine. The C64 was brilliant, easily the best out of the three technically, and if you wanted to play shmups or RPG's (indeed, the 64 was my first introduction to computer role-playing-games) then it was the perfect 8-bit system. I won't mention the SID chip - it's excellence has been discussed plenty here already. The Amstrad tbh was a disappointment. It had the ability to produce brilliant graphics (even more so than the 64, certainly palette wise - it was incredibly close to a Master System in that respect) but it was bogged down early on by piss-poor straight conversions of Speccy games that didn't take advantage of the machine. To my mind, if you took the graphics of the Amstrad, the hardware, sound and expansion capabilities of the 64, and injected the sheer invention and love of the machine that the Spectrum community has had since it's creation, you'd have arguably one of the greatest computers ever made.
But, whenever I divert away from Speccy stuff (usually picking up 64 hardware) I always end up coming back to the Spectrum. I'm not techy, i'm not a programmer (I love doing Speccy gfx, more than any other machine, even if it comes to bugger all most of the time.) I couldn't even tell you what half the stuff inside it does, but 33 years on now, some of my favourite games of all time are on the machine, and still tons of brilliant new games are released.
Anyway, ignore, grumble, pull apart what i've said, whatever. It's ONLY an opinion :smile:
Nope, SAAB 99. :lol:
Anyone who doesn't realise that it's the all round best car is clearly a moron. :)