View Single Post
Old 12 April 2017, 16:38   #46
PortuguesePilot
The Son of Luso
PortuguesePilot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Setúbal, Portugal
Posts: 339
You all present very good arguments worthy of being addressed individually.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorham View Post
The problem is that the Amiga scene is fragmented. How are people going to work together when some are interested in AGA+68020, while others are interested in next gen? You can't have such mixed interests in the same team. I for one wouldn't make a single concession when developing for AGA+68020/30, and it simply wouldn't be up for debate at all. In fact, I have a problem with sacrificing small amounts of speed on 68020/30 to make code run a little faster on 68060s
The fragmentation of the community is, indeed, an issue. While in other communities this is virtually unheard of (the difference between a Spectrum 48K and a 128K isn't all that big, and the C64 community is virtually absolutely homogeneous), the Amiga community does have a fair share of variation in hardware (not as much as the Atari community, though, that goes from the humble 520ST all the way to the Falcon). Yet, a similar community would be the MSX community, with the MSX1 being a rough equivalent of the 68000/OCS Amigas and the MSX2 being a rough equivalent to the 68020/AGA Amigas (in terms of community comparisons). Smaller but with similar issues is the X68000 community (there are significant differences between a stock X68000 with HumanOS 3.02 and a X68030 with an FPU, a PCM soundcard and SX-Windows).

Yet, those communities thrive, even the much smaller X68000 one. Why shouldn't the Amiga do so as well? As we've seen, fragmentation in itself is not an excuse. Sure, it helps to explain why there's this inertia in the Amiga community, but it's possible to overcome, as the X68000 and (especially) the MSX communities have shown. I get your point, though... the AGA machines can be seen as the benchmark and the starting ground (much like the 128K is in the Spectrum community or the MSX2 is in the MSX community), even though I have a softspot for the A500. I can accept that the 1200 be taken as the minimal requirement. No problem. But yes, that in itself doesn't solve everything. There's still the issue with FPGA and how to take advantage of it. I, myself, have stated elsewhere in these boards that FPGA is the way of the future for the Amiga (regardless of what purists may say, and note that I am more of a purist myself, though I'm not an extremist at that). The Vampire II and other cards of it sort that may come in the future opened a door of possibilities that can and should be explored. But that leaves the classic Amigas behind. And let's face it, there are still less people with Vampires than with them. They are also quite expensive as of yet. And until most Amigas are equipped with one (and once AGA is implemented into the Vampire II core, making it available on ALL Amigas, thus closing that gap), then it isn't yet the great equalizer that we all want it to be. The best way to deal with these discrepancies of today, then, would be two teams: one to focus on classic 680x0 Amigas, and another to focus on FPGA-based ones. Easier said than done, I know, but without resolve, nothing can be achieved. Right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akira View Post
Wouldn't you rather pay $3-5 for a simpler, GOOD QUALITY, indie game where clearly a lot of effort has been put, to encourage the developer to keep working on Amiga games?
Yes. 3 to 5€? Sure. I said so on my original post on this thread. I won't, though, pay more than that for games that clearly aren't up to par. I'm sorry to say it (truly, I am), but most modern Amiga games aren't very good. We load them, play them for a few hours, say "yes, it's OK" and then resort back to the good old classics. I don't know about you, but this happens to me all too frequently. Now if the game was free, all we can do is show appreciation and be thankful for them. Give its creators all the praise and respect they deserve for sharing - GENEROUSLY (a very valued virtue, in my book) - their hard work. BUT when a financial transaction is involved, market laws apply. A product must be of a minimal sort of quality for it to be marketable. If it's not, then people will frown upon the idea of buying it. This applies to games. And, as I said before, having high-quality classics is actually what makes many amigans weary of the modern games - because they compare. And, as we've all agreed, most modern software just isn't in the same league. That's why forking out money (more than 5-7€) for it is not a captivating prospect. It isn't for me and I dare say it isn't for the vast mass of silent amigans that, clearly, don't buy the games, seeing just how few of those games are actually sold.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akira View Post
(...) But out of the blue, who the fuck is going to dedicate full-time to making an Amiga AAA commercial-grade game? Again, as said a million times before, people who are possibly interested in this platform, are grownups who have a lot of shit on their plate and not 16 year olds living with mom who have a lot of free time, passion and energy to dedicate a whole year or two to wow everyone with their Amiga skills and create a AAA game. Also remember kids back then did that because there was a MARKET for commercial Amiga games, and it could become their career. Such a thing does NOT EXIST nowadays.
All fair arguments. But this is where the community spirit I spoke of before must be mustered. If the community was more enthusiastic and dynamic (and more willing to cooperate), then it would generate the needed momentum to leave this seemingly indefinite inertia that has plagued the Amiga community since 1995. Doing things just for the sheer pleasure of doing them. That's what fuels all the other communities I spoke of. If everyone else can, why shouldn't we? Are we any less than any of them? Even with all the aforementioned hindrances, if we really want to and we really get our heads into it, we'll surely do it. And in the beginning, it's harder 'cos firstly we have to get the wheel in motion, but once it is in motion, further development gets easier and faster (just look at what CEZ team did with the Spectrum). I do, however, get the feeling that many people in the Amiga community just don't want to run the extra mile. They're really not into it. They seem content (or resigned) with the status quo and aren't really willing to attempt a revival. As I've said before: what a pity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by viddi View Post
Well, it´s funny to see that some guys are bashing Backbone again and again.
You´re right that most BB games are crap, but until this day no one delivered a recent Amiga Action Adventure.

I produced two games of its kind (Tales of Gorluth I & II) and they are in German and English, have great storylines, professionally produced boxes and CDs made in Germany and hours of gameplay.

Without BB these games wouldn´t be here, because all coders I asked about joining this project in the past told me that they don´t have the time and will to finish complex projects (Action RPGs).

It was very hard work and you should appreciate that.
All efforts are appreciated. I repeat myself, since I've said it at least three times on my previous comments. BUT the big differentiator here is money. As I said above, once there is a commercial transaction, market rules apply. If you make a game, with nice graphics and good story, with attention to little details but it's slow, derivative and buggy, it will be greatly appreciated if it is generously given for free, but it will be prone to criticism if it is sold. The exact same end-product will be judged differently and classified differently if it was given or sold. That single little detail defines the reception a certain game gets. It's the same principle as the arcades. Remember that the arcade games used to be more fun back in the day than now via MAME? Why? 'Cos you forked the coin. THAT was the prime mobile. You HAD to make your INVESTMENT worthwhile. The same is true for the games that are sold vs games that are given. Given games are universally welcomed and generate great praise and honour to its creators. Sold games, on the other hand, are much more opened to scrutiny and criticism, and its creator may then feel unappreciated or even offended and choose to not make any more games. To avoid that and have people happy with the games they bought, the games have to have enough quality (and, in the Amiga case, that's saying something) for the people who bought them feel that their money was well spent. Hence why I said what I said on all of my comments in this thread. Make a really good Amiga game, make a small demo available for people to try before buying and if the game is really good, people will line up to buy it. It's just like hardware, really. If the Vampire II was crap, no-one would even consider buying it but since it's great, everyone wants one. It's time for the Amiga community to stop praising mediocre games and start having good ones (occasionally even great ones). If we have great hardware, it's time to have great software to come with it, else why would we even need the new hardware? Honestly, I think that we need a kick in the butt to get this community off its ass and see if we start doing something that's really good. All I'm attempting here, in all of my admittedly meagre means, is to deliver that kick in the butt. At least to try and get you all thinking about it...

Last edited by PortuguesePilot; 12 April 2017 at 16:57. Reason: typos fixed
PortuguesePilot is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.07228 seconds with 9 queries