On 2005-07-05 19:52, Robbo wrote:
The Speccy's main weapon in the 8-bit wars was it's games' playability and vastness of software, along with affordability.
I do agree with some of your points, because of emulation i like playing games on many systems now and like to try a fair few C64 games whereas before i couldnt.
I also cant stand the childish my computers better than yours type of argument, at the end of the day most of us are very biased so we're never gonna agree.
But one point which i found interesting was your one about 'main weapon in the 8 bit wars was the playability of the Speccy'.
To me thats #1, of course a nice graphic or sound adds to a game but playability is the biggest factor in ANY game. Pacman, Space Invaders, dire graphics but great gameplay back then. Space Invaders didnt have some amazing Rob Hubbard tune but did ok !
Why arent we playing amazing PSX2 games with amazing sound and graphics then ? Because a lot of the games arent that playable.
Why in the eyes of many teenagers nowadays are we playing crappy games with blocky graphics etc ? Why because of playability. Thats #1 over anything else.
I'm not gonna get into an argument about sound or graphics, sound i think the C64 was better but the Speccy could show that it 'could' do games like that but most games didnt have great sound. Graphics C64 were more colourful but blockier, Speccy less colours but more defined. How could the C64 have more lastability ? If you liked graphics/sound then perhaps but the reason we're still playing old games on MAME or even on an Atari VCS emulator is because of playability ! Look at the graphics in games nowadays, its laughable seeing the old graphics on the Speccy or C64, we play the games because of playability (and memories !).
I play Bombjack on the Speccy to this day because its so playable not because of some tune or nice graphics etc and many others.
Also at the end of the day its what machine you were bought up with, no ones really gonna change their minds so it just gets into a playground argument.
[ This Message was edited by: psj3809 on 2005-07-06 10:57 ]
On 2005-07-06 08:20, Arjun wrote:
Luckily, us Specchums know exactly what difference gameplay can make. The Speccy is a superior machine precisely because the games took full advantage of the capabilities (within limitations) of the machines and churned out games with excellent gameplay. So there!
I cannot see where Speccy games are better than C64 by default. There is a huge number of C64 games (about 18000 commercial games) and most of them are lousy, but even after excluding 95% of these there is still a big number of great games with great gameplay left. Maybe you just look at the wrong games?
But even C64 fans say that the Speccy had better gameplay ?
Bombjack one of the best arcade games ever is dire on the C64. Ghost n Goblins is colourful as anything but you cant press 'right and jump' next to an object, you have to be away from the object so you can jump over it. Very frustrating.
On the other hand Ghostbusters was very good on the C64 and dire on the Speccy, i must admit looking back at this game on any platform is was a very dire game and the hype from the film helped. The ghostbusting bit was okay but the driving was a waste of time.
There are many good games on the C64 i just find the Speccy games more playable and to me thats most important.
[ This Message was edited by: psj3809 on 2005-07-06 11:52 ]
On 2005-07-06 11:28, Fr?hn wrote:
I cannot see where Speccy games are better than C64 by default. There is a huge number of C64 games (about 18000 commercial games) and most of them are lousy, but even after excluding 95% of these there is still a big number of great games with great gameplay left. Maybe you just look at the wrong games?
No. It's just that the games c64 owners consider good are just plain lousy IMO. So the number is far less than 900 (5% of the games left with gameplay going by your figures)! :p
Seriously though, I have gone and downloaded a very selective bunch of games for the C64 (recommended by lemon64 and some others) and played them (and built up a collection of 100 odd games) but frankly I have found only a handful even remotely interesting to look and play.
To be fair, I AM evaluating them through nostalgia tinted glasses covered with a fair bit of bias but that's besides the point! Who said anything about me trying to be objective in criticism? No sir! Which is why I can say things like "Commode is sh**e!" without the remotest bit of guilt at being over-the-top! :D
On 2005-07-06 11:47, Arjun wrote:
Seriously though, I have gone and downloaded a very selective bunch of games for the C64 (recommended by lemon64 and some others) and played them (and built up a collection of 100 odd games) but frankly I have found only a handful even remotely interesting to look and play.
Similar for me... but for Spectrum games. You guys constantly overrate the gameplay which is in fact NOT better, just different due to the fact that most speccy games are from a different genre.
The gameplay isnt overrated at all, bit rich coming from C64 fans who constantly go on about their colourful graphics (dont often mention how blocky they are) though.
Like i say Bombjack, Ghost n Goblins are two perfect examples of gameplay. Bombjack is dire on the C64, one of my favourite games ever so i have tried it on many different versions.
Then of course we have the classic Knight Lore which didnt even appear on the C64. At the end of the day some of the most famous retro games appeared on the Speccy not the C64.
Wouldnt say we overrate gameplay, gameplays the most important thing.
On 2005-07-06 11:47, Arjun wrote:
Seriously though, I have gone and downloaded a very selective bunch of games for the C64 (recommended by lemon64 and some others) and played them (and built up a collection of 100 odd games) but frankly I have found only a handful even remotely interesting to look and play.
Similar for me... but for Spectrum games. You guys constantly overrate the gameplay which is in fact NOT better, just different due to the fact that most speccy games are from a different genre.
Erm... You're completely wrong.
Different genre? would you care to expand on that comment?
Cant believe your dragging me down into this boring argument Fr?hn ! Digs like 'a different genre' are piss poor though.
Anyway at the end of the day if my folks bought me a C64 or an Amstrad i would probably have used that for 8 years and defend that 15 years later in the retro boom. And if you were honest so would you if you had a Speccy instead of a C64.
I had a Speccy as my parents knew all my mates had one. But it could easily have been the other way round.
Why is it that BBC, Oric, Dragon, Amstrad users , a vast majority defend all their machines ? Because on the whole its what they grew up with and love.
Theres no point arguing with each other who or what is the best one, each has its own valid points and like i always say thanks to emulators i can try games now on many machines and consoles i never had. I think the MSX was a great machine which i never knew about back in the 80's.
Each machine gave us some golden memories in that amazing era and if you are truely unbiased (including you Arjun !) you would appreciate the other machine. The Speccy and C64 were both very very good thats why theres this banter between the two sets of fans, theres never a BBC vs Speccy argument or a C64 vs Oric argument is there ?
To create a great rivalry you need two excellent teams/computers etc otherwise if one was so much worse than the other this argument would have been killed off years ago.
At the end of the day if your folks bought you a Spectrum for Xmas and my folks bought me a C64 we would both be on opposite forums arguing our case.
On 2005-07-06 12:21, psj3809 wrote:
The gameplay isnt overrated at all, bit rich coming from C64 fans who constantly go on about their colourful graphics (dont often mention how blocky they are) though.
Most I see is Spectrum people defending their machine at all odds... Hardly any C64 people care for the Spectrum at all. Just look through the net, tons of sites which hail Spectrum and bash CPC and C64, but hardly any C64 site even recognizes the Spectrum.
I've seen many C64 fans do exactly the same and defend their machine in the old Speccy vs C64 'war'.
If C64 fans dont even recognise the Speccy and are blinkered enough to not even try games on it then they honestly cant have a proper view can they ? How can you take their opinions seriously if they havent given the other machine a decent go ?
And even with my limited knowledge of Spectrum demos i have seen a number of anti Commodore or anti Atari demos, while i do NOT know a single C64 demo which is bashing Speccy.
Of course there is anti-Speccy stuff out there, i mean you just joined this site which is 100% Speccy just to bash it so theres one instance and i'm sure if i went to C64 forums theres many anti-Speccy remarks. Please dont insult my intelligence.
As i said before each machine has its own pluses and minuses, and like i say because you had a C64 when you were young and me a Speccy we both went our different ways, if it was the opposite we would be defending our machines now 20 years on.
Just gets a bit boring. The best thing for me is being able to play a HUGE variety of games for practically any computer or console nowadays thanks to people who create emulators.
I remember a huge number of people joining Lemon 64 just for the same purpose :D
Anyway, most arguments "Speccy > C64" are kinda void since they are either nonsense or a matter of taste. I for example cannot see any better gameplay on Spectrum games, I prefer games like Katakis, Giana Sisters or Turrican... And never played those isometric "collect everything" games.
Also the graphics is more a matter of taste. In the end both machines have blocky graphics, 256x192 is not exactly high resolution...
Yes most of it is because we are biased thats our matter of taste.
You dont like the isometric collect everything games because they didnt appear on the C64 (what a coincidence !!). I'm probably not as fussed about music on games because the games i was bought up on really didnt have much music. (So again another biased view)
Both machines have some great games with great gameplay, unless you have really tried both you cant give an honest unbiased opinion, and when at the end of the day we either had one machine or the other our views will be biased whatever so the whole argument is pointless.
But its great trying new games on other systems, Great Giani Sisters is excellent on the C64 and i'm quite gutted there wasnt a Speccy version. Commando and Rambo i both love on the Speccy and C64 but its interesting to see two different versions.
Cobra i love on the Speccy whereas Ghostbusters on the C64 was far better. We could go on and on and on.
[ This Message was edited by: psj3809 on 2005-07-06 14:37 ]
One problem with people looking at other platforms is that they usually choose titles they know... And what they see is lame ports. Somehow ported games are always lame compared to their original, for example Giana Sisters is great on C64 but lousy on Amiga, even though the Amiga is far superior to a C64. Same for Wizball.
Now the same is ofcourse true for Speccy + C64. If you look at C64 ports of Spectrum games (there are a lot) you will recognize that they are usually the same as the original, but often slower graphics engine and removed graphics.
Yep theres a fair few on the C64 and also the Amstrad.
Because i know most of the 'big names' for the normal platforms i do enjoy finding a few games which i didnt know about. I also like finding some great games on consoles i knew nothing about, often might look at websites which have pics of games on other machines then of course if i like the look of them find the rom later.
Found many great games i didnt really know about previously for many different systems thanks to emulation. Because of emulation i also realise that most PC Engine games i played are brilliant, very underrated machine this is.
On 2005-07-06 14:21, Fr?hn wrote:
Anyway, most arguments "Speccy > C64" are kinda void since they are either nonsense or a matter of taste.
Ah. But you think the argument doesn't apply in inverse?
I for example cannot see any better gameplay on Spectrum games, I prefer games like Katakis, Giana Sisters or Turrican... And never played those isometric "collect everything" games.
All games that heavily leverage the sprite capabilities of the c64. No co-incidence I bet. What about vector based games, isometric games, or non-scrolly games? The Speccy had good games in every genre (even though it didn't have HW sprite support).
Also the graphics is more a matter of taste. In the end both machines have blocky graphics, 256x192 is not exactly high resolution...
Nonsense. The c64 clearly has blocky graphics. 256x192 may not be very high res but since all the Speccy games were in this mode you don't notice the fact until you see a c64 game and see how much worse they were!
On 2005-07-06 14:21, Fr?hn wrote:
Anyway, most arguments "Speccy > C64" are kinda void since they are either nonsense or a matter of taste.
Ah. But you think the argument doesn't apply in inverse?
Yes ofcourse.
All games that heavily leverage the sprite capabilities of the c64. No co-incidence I bet. What about vector based games, isometric games, or non-scrolly games? The Speccy had good games in every genre (even though it didn't have HW sprite support).
There is few good vector based games on C64, Mercenary or Elite comes to mind. But ofcourse when it comes to maths the Spectrum has about twice the power.
Nonsense. The c64 clearly has blocky graphics. 256x192 may not be very high res but since all the Speccy games were in this mode you don't notice the fact until you see a c64 game and see how much worse they were!
Look closely to some C64 games... Katakis or Giana are good examples here, they use BOTH modes at the same time, hires (320x200) and multicolor (160x200) on a character base. Some characters are hires, others are multicolor depending on if color is needed or if detail is needed. You can decide for every character if it should be hires or multicolor and the better games make use of that.
Hmm most posts here are talking about software as usual. If your comparing 2 machines to ask which is the 'better' then compare components, not the software that happened to be written for it.
This thread should be renamed 'Speccy vs c64 - which had the best software'.
If you really are comparing machines then the C64 is technically superior, think most ppl would agree on that.
All things considered the C64 was technically superior to the Spectrum for games, and I stress the word "technically". But the resolution loss for full colour is a big price to pay, and the colour pallette is one I never liked.
But after that mild criticism I still say that of course the C64 was great! I mean, do you think that it would have the following it has if it was rubbish?
You read the comments of people on these forums and Lemon64 that have played both machines, (guys like LeeT) and you can tell by the way they write that they know what they are talking about, and they are intelligent people. They aren't likely to be wrong. Besides, I know they aren't cos I've played some C64 games and they are good.
And who wants to play Speccy Boulderdash anyway?? :)
On 2005-07-06 19:49, beanz wrote:
If you really are comparing machines then the C64 is technically superior, think most ppl would agree on that.
Absolute bollocks, how can you make a statement like that and not back it up with reasons.
And anyway who are these 'most ppl' who consider the C64 technically superior, I don't think you'll find many round here agreeing with you.
On 2005-07-06 19:49, beanz wrote:
If you really are comparing machines then the C64 is technically superior, think most ppl would agree on that.
Absolute bollocks, how can you make a statement like that and not back it up with reasons.
And anyway who are these 'most ppl' who consider the C64 technically superior, I don't think you'll find many round here agreeing with you.
I'm sure your right as its a biased environment here.
However, the speccy was my favorite computer but its pretty straight forward that a computer with real sound, real keyboard, real disk drive, better video display, better color implimentation is a technically superior machine to one that has a beeper and a rubber keyboard and limited color capablity.
Being a speccy fan doesnt mean you have to have a blinkered opinion of other manchines. What your list of 'technical' betters on the spectrum?..dont tell me..more memory...what else?
I would like to point out (if I haven't already) that I am and was an owner of an Acorn Electron, Amstrad CPC 464, C64 AND Spectrum 48k (then 128k+). I am in a position to have an unbiased view on all of these 8-bits with regards to playing games (I am not trying to claim to be into the technical side of things.)
ALL FOUR models had superb games.
I previously quoted;
---"The Speccy's main weapon in the 8-bit wars was it's games' playability and vastness of software, along with affordability.
I will admit some games were better on the Speccy but overall the C64 was superior from graphics to sound and lastability."---
I stand by this BUT it doesn't mean the Spectrum actually was better than the C64 in playability, just that the Spectrum was able to hold it's own against the bigger boys.
I see a lot of C64 graphic bashing. I am the first to admit some games like TMNT (coin-op) and Street Fighter 2 had better looking detailed main characters, but just look at games like Turrican, Turrican 2, Dragon's Lair pt.2 Escape From Singe's Castle, Defender of the Crown, Vendetta, Last Ninja... all superb graphical games the Speccy could only ever dream of emulating.
The C64 had just as many games with tonnes of playability as the other models and this is from a NEUTRAL gamer who grew up without the restrains of rose tinted glasses.
Robbo.
[ This Message was edited by: Robbo on 2005-07-07 00:26 ]
On 2005-07-06 19:49, beanz wrote:
If you really are comparing machines then the C64 is technically superior, think most ppl would agree on that.
Absolute bollocks, how can you make a statement like that and not back it up with reasons.
And anyway who are these 'most ppl' who consider the C64 technically superior, I don't think you'll find many round here agreeing with you.
I'm sure your right as its a biased environment here.
However, the speccy was my favorite computer but its pretty straight forward that a computer with real sound, real keyboard, real disk drive, better video display, better color implimentation is a technically superior machine to one that has a beeper and a rubber keyboard and limited color capablity.
Being a speccy fan doesnt mean you have to have a blinkered opinion of other manchines. What your list of 'technical' betters on the spectrum?..dont tell me..more memory...what else?
To be honest I disagree with just about all of the C64 plusses. The C64 has 16 colours, the Spectrum has 15, the disk drive was only an add-on for the C64 whilst was an integral part of the +3 and and add-on (through 3rd party suppliers) for earlier models, the +2 and +3 had a proper keyboard, the AY chip provided sound as good as the SID chip. Better colour implementation??? Naah.
The Spectrum Basic was miles better the C64 basic. Writing anything for the C64 was a nightmare, what were all those POKES about!!!
The Z80 chip was also a thousand times better than the 6502. The 6502 was SO limiting, you spent all your time storing values in locations due to the lack of registers.
Oh yes and more avaiable memory.
On 2005-07-06 19:49, beanz wrote:
If you really are comparing machines then the C64 is technically superior, think most ppl would agree on that.
Absolute bollocks, how can you make a statement like that and not back it up with reasons.
And anyway who are these 'most ppl' who consider the C64 technically superior, I don't think you'll find many round here agreeing with you.
I'm sure your right as its a biased environment here.
However, the speccy was my favorite computer but its pretty straight forward that a computer with real sound, real keyboard, real disk drive, better video display, better color implimentation is a technically superior machine to one that has a beeper and a rubber keyboard and limited color capablity.
Being a speccy fan doesnt mean you have to have a blinkered opinion of other manchines. What your list of 'technical' betters on the spectrum?..dont tell me..more memory...what else?
To be honest I disagree with just about all of the C64 plusses. The C64 has 16 colours, the Spectrum has 15, the disk drive was only an add-on for the C64 whilst was an integral part of the +3 and and add-on (through 3rd party suppliers) for earlier models, the +2 and +3 had a proper keyboard, the AY chip provided sound as good as the SID chip. Better colour implementation??? Naah.
The Spectrum Basic was miles better the C64 basic. Writing anything for the C64 was a nightmare, what were all those POKES about!!!
The Z80 chip was also a thousand times better than the 6502. The 6502 was SO limiting, you spent all your time storing values in locations due to the lack of registers.
Oh yes and more avaiable memory.
Well to take your points we are talking about the base machines here, if you want to bring in other models then the Commodore 128 would have to be taken into account with its dual CPUs and 80 column display mode etc.
The disk drive is part of the whole computer system and was available from day 1 (I think) and supplied as a package deal as well if you wanted it. The CN2 tape was 'smart' and was much much more reliable than your dads old recorder... Speccy basic WAS better than c64 basic..but again..this is software not hardware. I dont understand how you can say spectrum color implimentation was better than the c64!
The keyboard is a no brainer and having programmed the speccy for pleasure and the C64 for business I can definately say the keyboard is a big factor!
Pluses and minuses on both side I totally agree, but as a whole package? The C64 was a computer with great manufacturer support in its peripherals that were available from day 1. The speccy was a sooped up calculator that relied on your dads old tape recorder for data storage until its strange little microdrive came along (and 3rd party devices).
Now, put the speccy in a C64 case, give it REAL manufacter peripherals available at launch and your have a winner.
Comments
I do agree with some of your points, because of emulation i like playing games on many systems now and like to try a fair few C64 games whereas before i couldnt.
I also cant stand the childish my computers better than yours type of argument, at the end of the day most of us are very biased so we're never gonna agree.
But one point which i found interesting was your one about 'main weapon in the 8 bit wars was the playability of the Speccy'.
To me thats #1, of course a nice graphic or sound adds to a game but playability is the biggest factor in ANY game. Pacman, Space Invaders, dire graphics but great gameplay back then. Space Invaders didnt have some amazing Rob Hubbard tune but did ok !
Why arent we playing amazing PSX2 games with amazing sound and graphics then ? Because a lot of the games arent that playable.
Why in the eyes of many teenagers nowadays are we playing crappy games with blocky graphics etc ? Why because of playability. Thats #1 over anything else.
I'm not gonna get into an argument about sound or graphics, sound i think the C64 was better but the Speccy could show that it 'could' do games like that but most games didnt have great sound. Graphics C64 were more colourful but blockier, Speccy less colours but more defined. How could the C64 have more lastability ? If you liked graphics/sound then perhaps but the reason we're still playing old games on MAME or even on an Atari VCS emulator is because of playability ! Look at the graphics in games nowadays, its laughable seeing the old graphics on the Speccy or C64, we play the games because of playability (and memories !).
I play Bombjack on the Speccy to this day because its so playable not because of some tune or nice graphics etc and many others.
Also at the end of the day its what machine you were bought up with, no ones really gonna change their minds so it just gets into a playground argument.
[ This Message was edited by: psj3809 on 2005-07-06 10:57 ]
Bombjack one of the best arcade games ever is dire on the C64. Ghost n Goblins is colourful as anything but you cant press 'right and jump' next to an object, you have to be away from the object so you can jump over it. Very frustrating.
On the other hand Ghostbusters was very good on the C64 and dire on the Speccy, i must admit looking back at this game on any platform is was a very dire game and the hype from the film helped. The ghostbusting bit was okay but the driving was a waste of time.
There are many good games on the C64 i just find the Speccy games more playable and to me thats most important.
[ This Message was edited by: psj3809 on 2005-07-06 11:52 ]
No. It's just that the games c64 owners consider good are just plain lousy IMO. So the number is far less than 900 (5% of the games left with gameplay going by your figures)! :p
Seriously though, I have gone and downloaded a very selective bunch of games for the C64 (recommended by lemon64 and some others) and played them (and built up a collection of 100 odd games) but frankly I have found only a handful even remotely interesting to look and play.
To be fair, I AM evaluating them through nostalgia tinted glasses covered with a fair bit of bias but that's besides the point! Who said anything about me trying to be objective in criticism? No sir! Which is why I can say things like "Commode is sh**e!" without the remotest bit of guilt at being over-the-top! :D
Bytes:Chuntey - Spectrum tech blog.
Like i say Bombjack, Ghost n Goblins are two perfect examples of gameplay. Bombjack is dire on the C64, one of my favourite games ever so i have tried it on many different versions.
Then of course we have the classic Knight Lore which didnt even appear on the C64. At the end of the day some of the most famous retro games appeared on the Speccy not the C64.
Wouldnt say we overrate gameplay, gameplays the most important thing.
Different genre? would you care to expand on that comment?
Anyway at the end of the day if my folks bought me a C64 or an Amstrad i would probably have used that for 8 years and defend that 15 years later in the retro boom. And if you were honest so would you if you had a Speccy instead of a C64.
I had a Speccy as my parents knew all my mates had one. But it could easily have been the other way round.
Why is it that BBC, Oric, Dragon, Amstrad users , a vast majority defend all their machines ? Because on the whole its what they grew up with and love.
Theres no point arguing with each other who or what is the best one, each has its own valid points and like i always say thanks to emulators i can try games now on many machines and consoles i never had. I think the MSX was a great machine which i never knew about back in the 80's.
Each machine gave us some golden memories in that amazing era and if you are truely unbiased (including you Arjun !) you would appreciate the other machine. The Speccy and C64 were both very very good thats why theres this banter between the two sets of fans, theres never a BBC vs Speccy argument or a C64 vs Oric argument is there ?
To create a great rivalry you need two excellent teams/computers etc otherwise if one was so much worse than the other this argument would have been killed off years ago.
At the end of the day if your folks bought you a Spectrum for Xmas and my folks bought me a C64 we would both be on opposite forums arguing our case.
Most bashing is from the Speccy side...
I've seen many C64 fans do exactly the same and defend their machine in the old Speccy vs C64 'war'.
If C64 fans dont even recognise the Speccy and are blinkered enough to not even try games on it then they honestly cant have a proper view can they ? How can you take their opinions seriously if they havent given the other machine a decent go ?
http://www.gamestage.net/english/test.html
http://www.alfonsomartone.itb.it/fztsmo.html
http://worldofstuart.excellentcontent.com/spec-c64.htm
etc...
And even with my limited knowledge of Spectrum demos i have seen a number of anti Commodore or anti Atari demos, while i do NOT know a single C64 demo which is bashing Speccy.
As i said before each machine has its own pluses and minuses, and like i say because you had a C64 when you were young and me a Speccy we both went our different ways, if it was the opposite we would be defending our machines now 20 years on.
Just gets a bit boring. The best thing for me is being able to play a HUGE variety of games for practically any computer or console nowadays thanks to people who create emulators.
Anyway, most arguments "Speccy > C64" are kinda void since they are either nonsense or a matter of taste. I for example cannot see any better gameplay on Spectrum games, I prefer games like Katakis, Giana Sisters or Turrican... And never played those isometric "collect everything" games.
Also the graphics is more a matter of taste. In the end both machines have blocky graphics, 256x192 is not exactly high resolution...
You dont like the isometric collect everything games because they didnt appear on the C64 (what a coincidence !!). I'm probably not as fussed about music on games because the games i was bought up on really didnt have much music. (So again another biased view)
Both machines have some great games with great gameplay, unless you have really tried both you cant give an honest unbiased opinion, and when at the end of the day we either had one machine or the other our views will be biased whatever so the whole argument is pointless.
But its great trying new games on other systems, Great Giani Sisters is excellent on the C64 and i'm quite gutted there wasnt a Speccy version. Commando and Rambo i both love on the Speccy and C64 but its interesting to see two different versions.
Cobra i love on the Speccy whereas Ghostbusters on the C64 was far better. We could go on and on and on.
[ This Message was edited by: psj3809 on 2005-07-06 14:37 ]
Now the same is ofcourse true for Speccy + C64. If you look at C64 ports of Spectrum games (there are a lot) you will recognize that they are usually the same as the original, but often slower graphics engine and removed graphics.
Because i know most of the 'big names' for the normal platforms i do enjoy finding a few games which i didnt know about. I also like finding some great games on consoles i knew nothing about, often might look at websites which have pics of games on other machines then of course if i like the look of them find the rom later.
Found many great games i didnt really know about previously for many different systems thanks to emulation. Because of emulation i also realise that most PC Engine games i played are brilliant, very underrated machine this is.
Ah. But you think the argument doesn't apply in inverse?
All games that heavily leverage the sprite capabilities of the c64. No co-incidence I bet. What about vector based games, isometric games, or non-scrolly games? The Speccy had good games in every genre (even though it didn't have HW sprite support).
Nonsense. The c64 clearly has blocky graphics. 256x192 may not be very high res but since all the Speccy games were in this mode you don't notice the fact until you see a c64 game and see how much worse they were!
Bytes:Chuntey - Spectrum tech blog.
There is few good vector based games on C64, Mercenary or Elite comes to mind. But ofcourse when it comes to maths the Spectrum has about twice the power.
Look closely to some C64 games... Katakis or Giana are good examples here, they use BOTH modes at the same time, hires (320x200) and multicolor (160x200) on a character base. Some characters are hires, others are multicolor depending on if color is needed or if detail is needed. You can decide for every character if it should be hires or multicolor and the better games make use of that.
This thread should be renamed 'Speccy vs c64 - which had the best software'.
If you really are comparing machines then the C64 is technically superior, think most ppl would agree on that.
I wouldn't. Give me the Spectrum's CPU every time.
Egghead Website
Arcade Game Designer
My itch.io page
But after that mild criticism I still say that of course the C64 was great! I mean, do you think that it would have the following it has if it was rubbish?
You read the comments of people on these forums and Lemon64 that have played both machines, (guys like LeeT) and you can tell by the way they write that they know what they are talking about, and they are intelligent people. They aren't likely to be wrong. Besides, I know they aren't cos I've played some C64 games and they are good.
And who wants to play Speccy Boulderdash anyway??
:)
https://discordapp.com/invite/cZt59EQ
And anyway who are these 'most ppl' who consider the C64 technically superior, I don't think you'll find many round here agreeing with you.
I'm sure your right as its a biased environment here.
However, the speccy was my favorite computer but its pretty straight forward that a computer with real sound, real keyboard, real disk drive, better video display, better color implimentation is a technically superior machine to one that has a beeper and a rubber keyboard and limited color capablity.
Being a speccy fan doesnt mean you have to have a blinkered opinion of other manchines. What your list of 'technical' betters on the spectrum?..dont tell me..more memory...what else?
ALL FOUR models had superb games.
I previously quoted;
---"The Speccy's main weapon in the 8-bit wars was it's games' playability and vastness of software, along with affordability.
I will admit some games were better on the Speccy but overall the C64 was superior from graphics to sound and lastability."---
I stand by this BUT it doesn't mean the Spectrum actually was better than the C64 in playability, just that the Spectrum was able to hold it's own against the bigger boys.
I see a lot of C64 graphic bashing. I am the first to admit some games like TMNT (coin-op) and Street Fighter 2 had better looking detailed main characters, but just look at games like Turrican, Turrican 2, Dragon's Lair pt.2 Escape From Singe's Castle, Defender of the Crown, Vendetta, Last Ninja... all superb graphical games the Speccy could only ever dream of emulating.
The C64 had just as many games with tonnes of playability as the other models and this is from a NEUTRAL gamer who grew up without the restrains of rose tinted glasses.
Robbo.
[ This Message was edited by: Robbo on 2005-07-07 00:26 ]
The Spectrum Basic was miles better the C64 basic. Writing anything for the C64 was a nightmare, what were all those POKES about!!!
The Z80 chip was also a thousand times better than the 6502. The 6502 was SO limiting, you spent all your time storing values in locations due to the lack of registers.
Oh yes and more avaiable memory.
Well to take your points we are talking about the base machines here, if you want to bring in other models then the Commodore 128 would have to be taken into account with its dual CPUs and 80 column display mode etc.
The disk drive is part of the whole computer system and was available from day 1 (I think) and supplied as a package deal as well if you wanted it. The CN2 tape was 'smart' and was much much more reliable than your dads old recorder... Speccy basic WAS better than c64 basic..but again..this is software not hardware. I dont understand how you can say spectrum color implimentation was better than the c64!
The keyboard is a no brainer and having programmed the speccy for pleasure and the C64 for business I can definately say the keyboard is a big factor!
Pluses and minuses on both side I totally agree, but as a whole package? The C64 was a computer with great manufacturer support in its peripherals that were available from day 1. The speccy was a sooped up calculator that relied on your dads old tape recorder for data storage until its strange little microdrive came along (and 3rd party devices).
Now, put the speccy in a C64 case, give it REAL manufacter peripherals available at launch and your have a winner.
_________________
I wanna tell you a story 'bout a woman I know...
[ This Message was edited by: karingal on 2005-07-07 00:58 ]