Ok, now that you have made it clear, Lukas, I see you compare people's misconception with Windows on every PC vis a vis people misconception of every Amiga owner using the A 500.
Thats fair. But my point is this: the vast majority of PC owners/users, I'd say close to 99 percent, use Windows. So you see, it was not too much of a stretch for me to assume you were boosting the OS (windows) and not the hardware. Glad we cleared that up.
Now, although I am a rabid retrogamer (with preference to Amiga, Atari St and Megadrive), my two favourite game genres, flight sims and racing games, are better on PC than those oldies. The reason is that the oldies cannot in any way match the physics models, damage models etc of the best PC flight sims and racers. Now get this ....very, very few PC racers/ flight sims get it right. Formula One 2002 and IL 2 Sturmovik, two of the best now, are near perfect. To a serious simulation fan like me, the physics models are crucial. Thats the problem with PC hardware; it's not the hardware, its the people who utilize it poorly when coding the bloated PC games out there. On the other hand, on the Amiga, because there was so little to work with in terms of space, the coders had to be efficient. Hence, most racing and flight simulations were excellent and as close to realistic as possible back then. A much higher percentage than nowadays. See? Thats my point freind. More is NOT neccesarily better.
Now, I think you miss Twist's point. Basically, the jist is the same as mine. But you make a serious flaw in stating that Amiga's stood in time. No way, they progressed from rally limited graphics and sound to games like Napalm and Foundations: Director's Cut and Myst. This all on the basic PPC architecture.