View Single Post
Old 23 August 2014, 13:46   #56
hansel75
Walk Off? Boolander!
hansel75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Gladstone Australia
Age: 42
Posts: 599
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlfrsilver View Post
@Hansel75 : Armalyte on C64 is exactly the same kind of game Super Edge Grinder is on amstrad CPC. The diff is that the CPC use a vivid palette. Armalyte palette is horrible ! Seems to be painted by a half-blind guy lol !

You see, this game could be done even more easily than R-type 2012 on CPC.

About Mayhem in Monsterland, yes it could be done on CPC in hard scroll (not in 50 fps because we don't need that), but i see nothing that the CPC can't do today.

A game like super cauldron is way more advanced than this one, not even speaking about Prehistorik 2. Even the standard CPC version use a hardware scrolling, and the screen is really big with many sprites on screen.

The CPC + is another story, it has a triple playfield, with hardware sprites, hardware scrolling, DMA soundtrack music (meaning that like the amiga, the sound is no burden for the CPU), and an amiga like palette (it needs 128kb for all these feats however).
A scrolling game running at a full 50hz refresh simply can't be overlooked, that was an achievement in itself back then and made the game better in every way with it's silky smooth movement!

I know a lot of C64 games didn't run at 50fps, there were quite a lot that probably ran at 25fps or even lower.

But in general there were a lot more c64 games that did the full 50fps compared to the cpc.

I have seen many old scrolling cpc games that look like there running at under 10fps and the sprite movement was horrendously bad.

Do you think a game like Super mario world on the snes would be as good if it only ran at 10-25fps instead of 50fps(or 60fps for ntsc)?

I guess back then they could of reduced the smoothness of c64 games to make them graphically better like some cpc games did, but the less smooth the less playable in my opinion.

And when i think about the 8bit wars in the 80's, i really think that only the c64, cpc 464 and zx spectrum should be used in the comparison as that is what 99% of people had!

If using an upgraded cpc model and then compare it to a stock c64, i don't see how this is fair.

One could always use the stats from a c128 with it's extra ram, or even the unreleased c65 if we wanted to see which 8bit machine was technically the best!
And should we also take the super cpu accelerators that are available for the c64 into consideration, in which i think gives you a 20mhz cpu!

I think a fairer comparison is a stock cpc 464 vs a stock c64.

As for Mayhem in Monsterland on the c64 which is a good example of a well made c64 game, nothing comes even close to it on the cpc 464, even super cauldron which doesn't look very smooth to play, mayhem on c64 feels like as smooth as an nes mario game!

And if it hasn't been done in the last 30yrs, it's unlikely you will ever see a cpc mayhem beater!

I also think when the cpc 464 uses it's high colour mode that the low res that comes with it makes the graphics look like chunky lego.

For every cpc batman demo there are dozens of c64 demos that look as good, for every Super Edge Grinder there are dozens of high quality c64 shooters that easily compare.
Same goes for Super cauldron, one example of a good looking and smooth cpc platformer, yet i could easily put up a huge list of c64 games that were as good if not better.

Anyway it was a nice debate but as always with fanboys like us, we will never agree, lol

Edit- The game Green beret is a good example of what most of your typical c64 games looked and played like compared to the cpc versions-
[ Show youtube player ]
[ Show youtube player ]

Last edited by hansel75; 23 August 2014 at 16:56.
hansel75 is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.05919 seconds with 9 queries