Why are platform games on the Amiga really mediocre?

[john1979]

Originally Posted by Shatterhand

I saw many people complaining about the inertina on it, but I think it was desgined to be this way on purpose, it takes a while to get used with it, but its part of its gameplay design and makes the game more interesting.

Haven't played this game, but generally inertia isn't a bad thing as long as it's not overdone. The inertia on Great Giana or Mario feels perfect, but the inertia on Terry's Big Adventure ruins the game because you're always fighting with it.

[Shatterhand]

It's way heavier than on Mario games, that's for sure

[jbenam]

I loved Terry's Big Adventure (still do!) when I was a child and I kept playing and playing and playing just to see the ending of the game... But it was a terribly frustrating experience, in hindsight.

You're just fighting against the game all the time - trying to memorize every single correct spot and timing for the jumps as such just because the inertia wants you dead.

I finished it years later thanks to WinUAE's savestates functionality...

Basically what the Japanese excelled in at the time was action games such as platformers and side scrolling beat em ups etc.. The consoles were stronger in these genres than the Amiga overall.

But still.. Having owned an Amiga, Megadrive and SNES in the early 90s I would have to go with the Amiga having a superior gaming library overall.
Take strategy games for example.. There were a few decent Japanese strategy games such as some of the old Koei games or Fire Emblem but nothing that could match the depth, balance or elegance of Civilization for example. The flight games on consoles were always oversimplified, shallow and arcadey things.. Basically like baby versions of the flight Sims you had on the computers. Japanese adventure/visual novel games never matched the best of western adventure games either when it comes to storytelling or especially puzzle design.. The few adventure gems that were ported to consoles didn't work all that well either, Monkey Island was a far more enjoyable experience on Amiga than Mega CD.
Then there stuff like Hunter, Dungeon Master, Eye of the Beholder etc..

If you're mostly an action gamer then the consoles are probably better for you but to me Amiga had an infinitely more interesting games. I do have a soft spot for some JRPGs like Chrono Trigger but for the most part it was just endless stream of sidescrollers on the consoles.

[john1979]

Originally Posted by LeChuck

If you're mostly an action gamer then the consoles are probably better for you but to me Amiga had an infinitely more interesting games.

The Amiga's handicap was a one button joystick which had become standard for games across C64 and Amiga. So games with more depth tended to favour the keyboard and mouse approach. This gave the Amiga strength in certain types of games but not others.

It depends on taste as well. I don't enjoy CRPGs like Eye of the Beholder. I'd rather play a JRPG any day. Strategy games I'm the same. Tactics Ogre is more enjoyable than any Amiga strategy game.

I do have a soft spot for some JRPGs like Chrono Trigger but for the most part it was just endless stream of sidescrollers on the consoles.

That's inaccurate. Given I can spend hours on the SNES and not touch a side-scroller or beat-em up quite easily. Both SNES and MD have incredibly varied libraries. Platformers dominate, sure, but not quite as heavily as you say.

Originally Posted by john1979

The Amiga's handicap was a one button joystick which had become standard for games across C64 and Amiga. So games with more depth tended to favour the keyboard and mouse approach. This gave the Amiga strength in certain types of games but not others.

It depends on taste as well. I don't enjoy CRPGs like Eye of the Beholder. I'd rather play a JRPG any day. Strategy games I'm the same. Tactics Ogre is more enjoyable than any Amiga strategy game.



That's inaccurate. Given I can spend hours on the SNES and not touch a side-scroller or beat-em up quite easily. Both SNES and MD have incredibly varied libraries. Platformers dominate, sure, but not quite as heavily as you say.

Fair enough. It's true that there is alot more to the SNES library than platformers. At the time it was hard to appreciate things like the admittedly brilliant JRPG library, Thracia 776 or Tactics Ogre because most as those were never released here in Europe at the time.
So many great games just stayed in Japan or USA. Fortunately now its a lot to get to play those games and enjoy some of the hidden gems in the library.

I still find Amiga to be way ahead when it comes to strategy games over the SNES. Civilization, Dune 2, Populous etc and even doubly so when it comes to simulation games.
Amiga also had really interesting games such as Heros Quest/Quest for Glory.. A game that combined adventure games and RPGs in a unique and genious ways. Granted it wasn't really an Amiga game in the sense that it was a pretty straight port from PC and was identical graphically to Atari ST and the PC EGA version but its the kind of game that would have been nearly impossible to do on a console due to limitations of just having a controller with a few buttons.

SNES also had its limitations when it came to action games. Nintendo went with a relatively slow processor which resulted in games like Megaman X or R-Type having loads of slowdown when there was a lot of stuff going on in the screen. That's the one advantage Genesis/Megadrivre had over the SNES and resulted in way better shmups such as Thunderforce. Though honestly I always preferred SNES to Genesis.. Nintendo always had the upper hand when it came to game design over SEGa Imo.

[john1979]

Originally Posted by LeChuck

SNES also had its limitations when it came to action games. Nintendo went with a relatively slow processor which resulted in games like Megaman X or R-Type having loads of slowdown when there was a lot of stuff going on in the screen. That's the one advantage Genesis/Megadrivre had over the SNES and resulted in way better shmups such as Thunderforce. Though honestly I always preferred SNES to Genesis.. Nintendo always had the upper hand when it came to game design over SEGa Imo.

Yeah I agree. The Megadrive was great but game design was often deeper and more engaging on SNES. There are some deeper Megadrive games but SNES had the upper hand.

The only shmup I can think of off hand that got around the slow CPU problem was Super Aleste. They must have pulled off some seriously genius programming to make that game. Oh and there was Parodius too, that didn't have much slow down. But the majority of SNES shmups did crawl at times.

Originally Posted by john1979

Yeah I agree. The Megadrive was great but game design was often deeper and more engaging on SNES. There are some deeper Megadrive games but SNES had the upper hand.

The only shmup I can think of off hand that got around the slow CPU problem was Super Aleste. They must have pulled off some seriously genius programming to make that game. Oh and there was Parodius too, that didn't have much slow down. But the majority of SNES shmups did crawl at times.

Ah Super Aleste. Really good game indeed and the best shmup on the system. COMPILE were gods at the time. Great work msx and NES and M.U.S.H.a on the Megadrive was great fun too.

Anyway back on topic.. As many has said the Japanese just were better at designing platform games at the time. Only in recent years with the titles like Retro's two Donkey Kong Country Returns games and maybe Super Meat Boy do I feel like American/European developers have managed to make something that stands toe to toe with the best Japanese platformers from purely game mechanics and level design perspective.

the one button joysticks on Amiga certainly didn't help either. There were some Amiga platformer I enjoyed but the reason its my favourite hardware platform lie on completely different types of games.

[Mrs Beanbag]

the thread that just won't die

[lordofchaos]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

the thread that just won't die

I`m guessing the "flamebait" title of the thread might have something to do with it. Maybe just a bit.

It certainly doesn't help by making the assumption in the question that Amiga games are mediocre, then asking for a response as to validate the claim. Classic.

[john1979]

Originally Posted by lordofchaos

I`m guessing the "flamebait" title of the thread might have something to do with it. Maybe just a bit.

It depends whether you agree or disagree with the claim! I agreed, so it wasn't flame bait to me. I don't think the OP meant it as flame bait either.

[lordofchaos]

I don't know if the original OP was posing the title as flamebait or not, but it reads as if the assumption is already true? Well at least to me. A less sensational title may be, "Are platform games on the Amiga Mediocre?".

Either way it doesn't bother me if it gets folks talking about games.

[Mrs Beanbag]

yeah there have been some interesting discussions here about game design and the Amiga's strong/weak points compared to other systems.

i'm just amazed that it keeps disappearing for a few months before being bumped back up again

[lordofchaos]

You can't keep a good thread down I suppose.

There aren't tons of great platformers on the Amiga, I`m cool with that. But I think there's enough decent ones to keep gamers happy. And even some really good ones. No Donkey Kong Country though

Yeah, my bad for bumping up the thread again.. Just wanted to give my 2 cents on the subject since I kinda resent the notion that Amiga games lacked design and professional teams.

That might have been somewhat true on the platforming side of things but people like Geoff Grammond, Sid Meier or the Lucasarts and Weswood designers at the time were just as professional as the best Japanese teams. And yes I realise a lot of those aren't exactly Amiga specific but contributed greatly the game library.

[lordofchaos]

I agree with your sentiment LeChuck. It's not about the computer doing one thing particularly great, it's the developers giving us choice and variety, and the Amiga had that in spades. That's what kept me loyal to the machine.

The Amiga. A jack of all trades, master of none? A pretty good place to be.

[nobody]

Play Metroid Fusion on the GBA, then try to find something on the Amiga with similar graphics, sound, story telling and quality. Then you will know why the consoles won the Amiga hands down. GBA is not far from SNES standards with lower resolution.

[ajk]

Looking at a YouTube video of Metroid Fusion, I don't see anything that the Amiga could not match (more or less, anyway, I didn't start counting colours) graphics and audio-wise. Looks like something between Turrican and Flashback, which weren't even AGA games.

I think the lack of these kinds of titles is mostly about how the whole software ecosystem of the platform worked. Nintendo developed many games in-house for their own hardware, Commodore did not. As far as I can tell many Amiga games came from rather small developers, often just one or two people, whereas most popular console games were developed by large studios. And yeah, I'm sure there are exceptions both ways.

[commodorejohn]

Metroid Fusion is too damn railroadey anyway. I don't play a Metroid game to be hog-tied to one particular path, dammit!

[clebin]

Originally Posted by nobody

Play Metroid Fusion on the GBA, then try to find something on the Amiga with similar graphics, sound, story telling and quality. Then you will know why the consoles won the Amiga hands down. GBA is not far from SNES standards with lower resolution.

I don't see the relevance - you're talking about a game from 2002. It's a different world from the one the Amiga inhabited.

Chris