MS Dos Games equal or better than Amiga games

[deicidal]

I completed Wolfensteign on my battered old 286

[mombasajoe]

I´ve had an Amiga 500 1MB, my father a 286 15 Mhz with HERCULES GFX (monochrome) and "Beep beep".

Zak McKracken: Better on Amiga (colours , sound)

Grand Prix Circuit: Nice GFX and sound on Amiga, by miles more playable on 286 (even with keyboard)

Spy vs. Spy III: like Zak

Falcon F16: see GPC, nice but slow GFX on Amiga, really smooth and fast on 286...286 was more fun

[s2325]

My 286 loudly died today.

[laffer]

I see there is some argument about what is the best version of Dune 2... I have to admit I find the PC version much better.

[Monsterland]

Ofcourse it is but this is an amiga fanatic forum

[mombasajoe]

In "Wet -the sexy Empire" the Win95-videos are more delicious than the Amiga-vids.

In "Biiing!" the nice tutorial-vid with the nurse is totally missing in the Amiga-version. On the other hand the DOS-"Biing!" has got a censored golf-room (hole in one)...the Amiga has got the "real thing"...

Wet (Amiga): Wet (Win) = 0:1
Biing!(Amiga):Biing!(DOS)= 1:1

DOS/Win is slighty in the lead regarding just the really important games!

[fishyfish]

Bit of thread necromancy here, but Im surprised no-one has mentioned Zool2.
For a game that was supposed to be an amiga game it sure was beaten silly by the ms-dos version (amongst others).
I did still enjoy it on the amiga, but graphics are considerably better in ms dos version, and there's not nearly half the slow down.

A really nice little platformer for the day.

[stevsurv]

PC DOS version of Captive had the intro and music where Amiga version had no intro but better sounds. Game play seems to be harder on the PC version for some reason.

Still enjoy the Amiga version better.

[demolition]

I generally preferred the Amiga versions of most games back then, mainly due to the fact that the Amiga versions often had better graphics as PC versions were often designed to run on EGA machines. Sound was also better on the Amiga (compared to PC-Speaker or my 16-bit SB compatible soundcard) and the game was generally smoother.

Doom and other 3D games was the exception which worked best on the PC.

Only with a GUS could the PC keep up with the Amiga sound, but it was quite expensive if you wanted a full PC with a decent GFX card and a GUS.

[Oldskool Bitz]

Originally Posted by demolition

I generally preferred the Amiga versions of most games back then, mainly due to the fact that the Amiga versions often had better graphics as PC versions were often designed to run on EGA machines. Sound was also better on the Amiga (compared to PC-Speaker or my 16-bit SB compatible soundcard) and the game was generally smoother.

Doom and other 3D games was the exception which worked best on the PC.

Only with a GUS could the PC keep up with the Amiga sound, but it was quite expensive if you wanted a full PC with a decent GFX card and a GUS.

I second that. Amiga was incredibly ahead of it's time...

[Retro-Nerd]

Ports are worse. This is a general rule for me.

And far too general. It's a matter of the effort (and sometimes money) you put into ports. B.C. Kid e.g. beats the original PC Engine version of Bonk version. International Karate Plus (C64) is also better on the Amiga, or the 16bit Elite conversions. Indy IV for the Amiga shows, that you can do a nice PC graphics conversion with lesser colors.

[s2325]

Originally Posted by s2325

Amiga Crime Wave is just degraded MS-DOS version. Heavy cuts in some places but I don't like both versions. You can watch longplay of DOS version on youtube.

review of PC version [ Show youtube player ]

[Mrs Beanbag]

the only DOS game i ever had is ZZT, nice little text-mode game where you could design your own dungeons. It still has quite a following (or at least it did when i gave it a look back in 2004-ish).

[ReadOnlyCat]

Interesting thread.
I kept using my A1200 for quite a while in the university when all of my friends except two had PCs but I never really got the chance to compare DOS and Amiga versions of the games of that time.
Playing Ultima VII in VGA on my parents's PC a few years earlier had made me realize how sorely the A500 needed an upgrade even if I did not play the game that much because the PC did not have a mouse which for me was an unacceptable downgrade.

[SilentBob]

Outrun for DOS looked and played pretty well. Sadly, only internal bleepity bloop sounds tho.

[ Show youtube player ]

[beezle]

Off the top of my head:

Mortal Kombat 1, 2, and 3, Super StreetFighter2, SSF2T, pretty much any point 'n click adventure, Settlers (almost splitting hairs with that one, but dos version has bug fixes vs Amiga), Zool2 (better gfx and less slowdown).

Generally speaking the Amiga struggled to compare favorably in any multi format game from early to mid 90's onwards. While this was at times due to technical shortcomings, it was more often because of the Amiga being an afterthought. It has an unfortunate amount of "lowest common denominator" lazy ports. Stripped back "non amiga-fied" console ports because Amiga hardware sprites, etc don't compare, but also stripped back PC ports because CPU speed, non chunky, fewer colors, etc.
In both scenarios it was often developed for as a weaker version of said hardware, despite the fact that it is a platform unto itself. Near to as capable for a lot of games at the time as a PC or console, just different.
While multiplatform games often suffered during this time, it was also a good period for original Amiga titles.

[turrican3]

The best you have to do with a pc in 1992 at the same price
than an amiga 1200 is : FORMAT C:

[beezle]

I'm often baffled at the prices people quote for PC gear.
When I got my a1200+ 50mhz '030 bliz mk4 "back in the day" it was more expensive than the (fully decked out) pentium 200 system I bought the same week.
As much as I enjoy the Amiga it seldom got touched at the time as it was technically inferior in every way imaginable (apart from the OS, but I don't mind dos anyway). Not to mention the fact that quality games were drying up on the Amiga by this point.

Even a few years prior to that a dx2/66 could be bought for about $500. I got one with an unemployment loan, which could be up to $500, so Im definitely remembering correctly.

All this junk people make up about various computers just to make the Amiga seem better, in my opinion does the exact opposite. If a person feels the need to twist and contort history then one can't help but wonder if the machine they champion has shortcomings that are being glossed over. This of course isn't just an Amiga vs (insert system here) thing, but is obviously prominent on an Amiga site.

All computers can be fun. I really don't understand why some people feel the need to try to dismiss one platform vs another. Especially when the machines in question were archaic 15 years ago.

To each their own I guess, but it seems bizarre to me.

[roondar]

Originally Posted by beezle

I'm often baffled at the prices people quote for PC gear.
When I got my a1200+ 50mhz '030 bliz mk4 "back in the day" it was more expensive than the (fully decked out) pentium 200 system I bought the same week.
As much as I enjoy the Amiga it seldom got touched at the time as it was technically inferior in every way imaginable (apart from the OS, but I don't mind dos anyway). Not to mention the fact that quality games were drying up on the Amiga by this point.

Even a few years prior to that a dx2/66 could be bought for about $500. I got one with an unemployment loan, which could be up to $500, so Im definitely remembering correctly.

All this junk people make up about various computers just to make the Amiga seem better, in my opinion does the exact opposite. If a person feels the need to twist and contort history then one can't help but wonder if the machine they champion has shortcomings that are being glossed over. This of course isn't just an Amiga vs (insert system here) thing, but is obviously prominent on an Amiga site.

All computers can be fun. I really don't understand why some people feel the need to try to dismiss one platform vs another. Especially when the machines in question were archaic 15 years ago.

To each their own I guess, but it seems bizarre to me.

I suppose it really depends on the year and the country.
For instance, in 1989 in the Netherlands, a PC could cost 3000-3500 guilders, while an Amiga 500 cost closer to 1200 guilders.

In 1992 (when I bought my A500), the A500 was about 800 guilders and a PC with VGA and soundcard still cost upwards of 2500 guilders. You did get a 486 DX/2 for that though, so you did get much better hardware for it.

When I bought my Pentium MMX 166 with Windows 95, SVGA and soundblaster in 1996 I know for a fact I paid 2500 guilders (as I needed a loan and I couldn't get any more than that). Which was about the same price as the total cost for my A1200 + Blizzard IV + 16MB + Tower. Naturally, the Pentium was way faster.

In US dollars that would've been about half that for each number.

Don't underestimate how expensive PC's where in Europe. They really where not cheap until quite late in the game.

Edit:

I should add that the PC prices did include a monitor in all cases - in 1989 this would've been a green/green monochrome one, in 1992 and later that would've been a (S)VGA one. The monitor that came with my PC cost about 700 guilders out of the total price. Adding a monitor to the Amiga 500 setup would've cost me about 500 guilders.

Also corrected the A500 price based on an advert from the time.

[beezle]

Yeah, I guess I need to remember that prices did vary quite a bit depending on location. Additionally I've always been in the position to buy ex-tax, wholesale prices, which probably skews my perspective a little. I remember "normal" local prices generally seeming quite high too.