View Single Post
Old 22 August 2014, 19:58   #43
dlfrsilver
CaptainM68K-SPS France
dlfrsilver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melun nearby Paris/France
Age: 40
Posts: 7,061
Send a message via MSN to dlfrsilver
Quote:
Originally Posted by hansel75 View Post
Well for every technically good cpc game that scrolled smoothly etc, there where probably 10x C64 games that were just as good!
i have a C64, and sorry, but if many games have 50 fps scroll and "terrible" sound, most of the time, the graphics are so crap really. As bad as coin-op from early 80's graphics, really awfull. I don't buy that.

I have myself a C64. And when i compare the big productions like operation wolf or thunderbolt, or either chase HQ, just to name a few, and play it on my C64, sorry, but it's inferior to what we have on CPC. What makes a good game is the playability, animation, sound and graphics. The C64 mostly has playability (more or less, some games have crap control really), and the SID sound.

Quote:
The only aspect i would regard the cpc to be better then the c64 in is it's colour palette, but in saying that the cpc colours can look very garish at times.
You're right about the garish palette. Here is the explanation :

After looking at it, it appears that most graphists fucked them big time on CPC, because they were not smart enough to transpose it without making it buggy from the C64. Just an example of this is stormlord. The graphist failed to use and transpose correctly the palette from the C64. It's not a technical problem, it's not a computer problem, it's clearly a problem between "the chair and the keyboard" as we say here.

Quote:
And at least 99% of C64 games used full colour, a lot of cpc games where in monochrome like the spectrum versions, yes the cpc could of done colour in those games if the coders tried hard, but they didn't and a lot of the time took the easy way out with monochrome.
Yes let explain it like this : "Oh god, we're dumb, because we spent 4 months more on the C64 version and now we're in late to make a correct version for amstrad CPC....Oh no !!! Blimey !"

I'm kidding when i say that, but in the end this was what happened, you clearly see that it's the case. Coding for CPC is easier than coding for the C64 and all it's trickeries. The CPC is more straight forward. And look : the CPC had to run spectrum emulator, as it is for R-type, and that's why the game is so slow in its original version, not counting that the guy has 2 weeks to code the game !

Quote:
And for every impressive cpc demo there where probably 20x times more on the C64 that shined as well!
The CPC has more than the guts for demos, if you just look the batman forever demo, sorry but i have not seen something equivalent on C64.
it's as good and equivalent to amiga or ST productions.

Quote:
The 'overall' quality and quantity of the cpc range of games and demos simply cannot be compared to the huge amount of quality C64 releases.
I have looked at many C64 demos, and also quite a lot on CPC.

Mind you, the CPC demomakers were not trying to surpass the C64, they were trying to do things as good as the ones you can find on the amiga.

Quote:
Sure the cpc might do more when put into the right hands, but these 'technically better then c64 examples' are really only a couple of examples in the overall scheme of things.
They are more numerous than what you think.

Quote:
There so many games on the cpc that used flick screen, or most had slow jerky scrolling, and the games that scrolled and moved as smoothly as the c64 versions were rare.
there are rare games running at 50 fps on CPC. But it's not what we need.
If i want 50 frames per sec, i pick an amiga, with which i get the colors + the animation speed, not the C64.

[quote]And a lot of cpc games had very basic sound that sucked compared to the c64 versions, sure there are examples where the cpc can do good sound but a lot of games sucked sound wise.[quote]

In a lot of time, and to say things straight, the CPC had to wait long years to get tools that were really pushing their YM chip far. Startrekker soundtracker on CPC appeared in 1992-1993, not before.

The CPC is able to make great soundtracks, once again it's a problem between "the chair and the keyboard". Whitakker, page, Joseph, dave rodgers and others made legendary musics on amstrad CPC. Many others made shit.

Quote:
Yes the cpc was more capable then what some of the old coders did with it, but it just seemed so much easier to do the same thing on a C64, without having to wait 30yrs for some clever coders to comes along and make an amazing looking cpc product.
The CPC as said by the batman forever demo team has only be used to something like 10%. Which is ridiculous.

This computer in the right hands (understand here with a good knowledge of the Cathodic Ray Tube Controller, something like the copper on the amiga), can do awesome games, almost 16 bits like.

Quote:
Then there is the fact that some of these cpc examples that have been mentioned require a cpc with 128k ram vs the 64k on the C64.
You're right and get a point here. All the coders had the 464 with its 64kb of ram in mind, and yes, this was a problem. A computer like the CPC required at last 128kb of ram, better 256kb to pass the fence. With this much memory, no other 8 bit machine can come up to it. The video ram problem, hardware double buffer are no more a problem.

Quote:
And keep in mind when using an example like the R-type remake on the cpc, if comparing it to the c64 version there is a 20+ year difference in release dates, of course the cpc remake is going to look nicer.
Right, but the abilities of the computers are unchanged. always the same.
Rtype enhanced is nicer, because the graphist did his job ! Correctly, and in the right way ! Not porting from C64 or Speccy !

[quote]And to my knowledge the cpc was a more expensive computer then the c64 was as well so in theory "it should of been better".[quote]

That's the full contrary. Sugar killed the C64 in France with the CPC for 2 reasons :

1- The price. a CPC costed 4990 francs with a color monitor. For this same price, you got a C64 with no drive, no TV, and no Datasette.

It's was a game console for rich people. In the other way, french engineers loved the CPC, and in companies, the amstrad was in every mouth. Perfect all purpose computer. The C64 was seen as a toy.

2- A C64 was sold with no monitor, and the parents hated that (fuck, again a console on the family TV, that's a NO!)

3- OMG! Look at this crap color palette ! Ehm, seller, do you have any computer not this expensive with a good color palette ?

4- Hello Mr seller, we would like to buy a family computer, we heard that the amstrad CPC is the top computer of the moment, where are they ?
Ehm.... Well, look i have this incredible C64 computer, with a great palette, a synthesizer sound, smooth scrolling..... Sir, we said we want a computer, not a toy or a console, and leave us alone with the palette.... Wait, you throw up on the screen or is it me ?

This is a caricature, but this was more or less what happened when seller in shops were trying to sell the C64 in France. It was so serious that commodore almost went bankrupt in France due the C64 failure.

Quote:
This has been discussed before, but it's always a fun topic, i just hope i didn't start a cpc vs 64 war again
It's not a war. My father is an ex-engineer, and just as a test, when i bought my C64, i showed it to him, and i asked him what he thought of it.
Answer : that's a console with a keyboard or a toy !

Quote:
I do have to ask this question though, if the cpc is so much superior to the c64, then why did a lot of it's games look jerky and slow compared to the c64 versions.
Because there were fanboys in the coders, and also mismanaged projects, where they spent too much time on a platform, with less time on others, not counting the guys coding with their feet.

Some CPC games have been massacred like some amiga games.

These 2 computers shares this same problem unfortunately

Quote:
Sure the cpc has a faster cpu which is good for 3d wireframe games, but it lacked the custom chips to offload the workload from the cpu that the c64 has.
It has "custom chips" : the CRTC is one. it allows hardware scrollings.
It also have in ROM ready to use mathematical operation (COS, SIN, TAN), very useful for demos.

Quote:
Just have a good look at the amount of sprites and stuff that's happening in a game like Armalyte on the C64 all as smooth as butter, i haven't seen anything on the cpc that impressive in a shooter.
Edge Grinder on CPC is a shooter in 16 colors, hardware scrolling and multiple enemies on screen with no slowdowns. Just try

Quote:
And only one has to look at some of the stages in the Turrican games to see how impressive the c64 really was, the shooting stages in turrican 2 with there multi direction parallax scrolls and impressive sprites all running ultra smooth, plus it's quality colour and tunes, well enough said there.
Turrican is clearly not a good case to bash the CPC, either I or II.

I have turrican I and II on C64, and even if the CPC has no level musics,
i prefer it on CPC (16 colors, hardware tricks, parallax scrolls on both). Turrican series on CPC are legendary games, extremely well coded and ported from the 16 bits machines.

Quote:
How many games on the cpc used parallax scrolling, no where as many as the c64 had i bet!
quite a number, but not as much as on the C64.

Quote:
And if i should mention audio quality, i don't think there is much contest there when it comes to the Sid chip in which everything else sucked at the time!
some games on CPC have better musics than the ones on C64. robocop, Batman the movie, and i could continue on others.

Quote:
The way i see it is the cpc vs the c64 is like comparing the st to the amiga!
Most CPC users were dreaming of the amiga, not the ST, and not the C64 !

The ST was a 16 bits computer that was 8 bits like on some parts, while the CPC has the guts to be raised as almost what was doing a 16 bits machine. Complicated heh ?

Quote:
And as for the cpc dominating in France this is one small country, the C64 dominated the rest of the world and was alive and kicking well into the 90's.
Smaller than Germany, but France is one of the biggest country of Europe.

Dominating the rest of the world, but a little village was still resisting to the invader ! (if you read Asterix... )

Quote:
In the 80's and 90's here in Australia i only knew one person who owned a cpc 464, yet i knew dozens of c64 owners over there lifetimes!
Same here, none of the guys i knew had a C64, too expensive, too complicated, not what we wanted. The CPC was in most families, next to the Atari ST and the Amiga.

Quote:
There is a reason why the C64 was and still is the worlds biggest selling computer!
Yes, but not the ones you're thinking of !

Quote:
And saying "Just to say that having games with 50 fps scroll and synth music" on the C64 like it was meaningless back in the 80's seems silly.
it's not silly. I don't know any mom and dad that would have paid a huge amount of money to get a console computer with no monitor and just to be able to see a scrolling running at 50FPS. they were akin to buy a full purpose computer, proposing both Excellent utilities and working programs, as well as fun games to play.

Quote:
Why wouldn't you want a smooth 50fps scroll in most of your games and awesome synth sounds, every game that came out in the 80's on any format could of benefited from these aspects.
Because while it's awesome on a 16 bits computer like the amiga, it's crap on an 8 bits computer to me. I don't need a fast scrolling to kill my eyes on a 16 colors game with a crap palette.

Quote:
Also gameplay comes into account here to, the smoother the game the more playable it should be.
It's not linked. And a wrong statement. Look by yourself : How many amiga games runs at 50 fps and have a bad or crap playability. Answer : a lot !
On CPC we had some games runs at 25fps having really bad playability (read : badly coded), and some running at the same speed with a good one. Same aroma exist with games running at 15fps.

Quote:
You can say the cpc is technically better then the c64 from a handful of selected examples, but just go back and look at the last 30yrs worth of software in general for both systems and i think the c64 simply outshines the cpc in virtually every way!
Because the coders wanted it this way, and a lot of them were simply unable to handle the CPC, a simpler platform than the C64 ! Shame heh ?

Quote:
Edit- Sorry for the novel
You wrote it, i published it !
dlfrsilver is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.08714 seconds with 9 queries