Future of Amiga?.

[Thorham]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

actually i like limitations

Yeah, I like those limitations, too. Makes it more challenging to get things done. With todays machines many things are so easy to get fast enough. On a 68k it's not so easy, and that's fun.

[Mrs Beanbag]

another thing i like about the old computers is that you can just look at a screenshot and tell what computer or console it was from. the limitations gave everything an identifiable style. with modern hardware games look the same on everything.

[daxb]

Originally Posted by matthey

I like the old Amiga hardware but it has limitations. I like the new Amiga hardware which removes limitations while maintaining compatibility. This maximizes software availability including old and retro software while allowing more modern uses and more creativity. This should be good for everyone Amiga. Lack of standards and direction decisions are a problem for new Amiga hardware but the old Amiga hardware still works for those who prefer it. I can understand the new Amiga hardware guys arguing about which way hardware development should go but I don't understand the philosophical argument between old and new Amiga hardware.

I agree to this. Further, if someone fears limitations are lost or gone. It is unnecessary because you have or can have the same limitations as the old Hardware has when it comes to creative work. E.g. with Protracker the limitations are equal. Nearly the same goes for DPaint/PPaint. Programming just becomes more comfortable (faster compile time, higher screen resolution). Working becomes faster (response time) then on modern pc. Overall you get more freedom in doing things what you still liked as on OCS/AGA/RTG Amiga. I don`t see any real disadvantages. At least if you are not fixed on old hardware itself or have very special definition of "original".

[matthey]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

all hardware has limitations.

actually i like limitations, just like some people like solving a maze, while another person prefers to run about in the open field.

Yes, there will always be hardware limitations. For programmers who like the old Amiga limitations as a challenge, they can keep targeting as low of an Amiga spec as they wish going back all the way to an unexpanded Amiga 1000. With new compatible Amiga hardware, this target could have the advantage of working on more Amiga computers (old and new if well written). IMO, creating good modern games is at least as challenging as good retro games on limited hardware.

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

another thing i like about the old computers is that you can just look at a screenshot and tell what computer or console it was from. the limitations gave everything an identifiable style. with modern hardware games look the same on everything.

That is because FPS type games have taken over. I have nothing against FPS games and even enjoy the better ones but I would like to see other types of games return to popularity. The classic Amiga is best at 2D low color (maybe dual playfield) platform games. More colors, more bandwidth, larger bobs, more layers including a chunky layer, higher resolutions and more processing power could enhance these types of games as well as becoming competitive with 2D sprite based games from old consoles (as well as allowing full speed emulation of more consoles). Jay miner tried to remove hardware limitations (the blitter name came from the Amiga!) so the Amiga could be the best affordable computer at flight simulators but now even cell phones and the Raspberry Pi are better. 3D hardware would allow more than FPS games but also overhead 3D games and all new 3D effects. Some people say that new classic Amiga hardware is against the philosophy of the Amiga but I think not innovating violates the original (Jay Miner) Amiga philosophy.

Originally Posted by daxb

I agree to this. Further, if someone fears limitations are lost or gone. It is unnecessary because you have or can have the same limitations as the old Hardware has when it comes to creative work. E.g. with Protracker the limitations are equal. Nearly the same goes for DPaint/PPaint. Programming just becomes more comfortable (faster compile time, higher screen resolution). Working becomes faster (response time) then on modern pc. Overall you get more freedom in doing things what you still liked as on OCS/AGA/RTG Amiga. I don`t see any real disadvantages. At least if you are not fixed on old hardware itself or have very special definition of "original".

Certainly more people are choosing to develop on more modern hardware whether the Amiga or not. It seems natural to give them a more modern Amiga to save time and focus on being creative.

[Mrs Beanbag]

Originally Posted by matthey

That is because FPS type games have taken over.

it's not just that. it's because now that every computer and console is capable of rendering as many texture mapped and fully shaded triangles as there are pixels on the screen, at 60fps in 24-bit truecolour 1080p, there is really nothing visual to distinguish between the output of an XBox One from a PS4 or a PC. Any game that is produced for the different machines can use exactly the same assets and look identical on all of them.

[eXeler0]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

it's not just that. it's because now that every computer and console is capable of rendering as many texture mapped and fully shaded triangles as there are pixels on the screen, at 60fps in 24-bit truecolour 1080p, there is really nothing visual to distinguish between the output of an XBox One from a PS4 or a PC. Any game that is produced for the different machines can use exactly the same assets and look identical on all of them.

Thats not entirely accurate. Especially the Xbox One is struggling with 1080p.
So the limitations are not quite gone yet. And its very obvious that the WiiU doesnt have the power to run something like "The Order 1886".
But sure, I get what you mean.

We will probably see another generation of 4k capable consoles before we go down the cloud streaming path...
That generation will probably remove the last distinguishable limits among them.

However, its simply the natural evolution towards real time photo realism. It is natural to aim for that. Polycount + adaptive tesselation will be "good enough" within a console generation or so"... Right now we still need to fake lightning for true realism.. but progress is being made for real time solutions and next console gen will come close to "pre-rendeted" stuff of today. But we still need at least 4k before we stop distracting our eyes with low resolution.
As for VR, not even 8k res is enough. So the hunt for more bandwith will continue beyond the next generation.

When we get there, the console brands will have less meaning than today. But Im guessing this is more than simply one generation away.

However..
If we fast forward 20 years and then look back at all this.. it will all fit together nicely.
The hardcore Atari 2600 fans probably thought that the 16-bit consoles and computers "all look the same" but when things are put into proper perspective it all adds up...
The Amiga had several styles early on, including 2d platformers, 2.5D RPGs and 3d polygons...
Lets simply enjoy the various styles posibble by the different hardware over the years and obsess less with whst particular style should be associated with a proper retro-amiga :-)

[Mrs Beanbag]

Originally Posted by eXeler0

However, its simply the natural evolution towards real time photo realism. It is natural to aim for that.

and i'm not knocking that. but, for instance, you can look at any C64 graphics and immediately recognise it as C64, same for Sinclair Spectrum and any other computer of that era. Atari ST and Amiga were already getting a bit more difficult to distinguish, at least, it was easy enough to convert from ST to Amiga without changing anything (even though the Amiga could do better)...

But what i mean is the certain "look" that each computer used to have, that was the result of the hardware limitations, that gave each its own character, which you don't get now. Maybe the XBox One sometimes drops a few frames here and there if there's too much detail, but nobody would see that and think "ah, good old XBone graphics," it's simply an inadequacy.

That's partly why people still like to do retro-games, and retro-art as well, i suppose, because it has a character, or some whimsically atmospheric quality that's hard to explain. The hardware itself brings something unique to the result, whereas with the more advanced hardware the limitations don't have anything positive to add anymore. The same goes for sound as for graphics. But not so much for programming, i suppose, since Turing Completeness already happened a long time ago!

[matthey]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

it's not just that. it's because now that every computer and console is capable of rendering as many texture mapped and fully shaded triangles as there are pixels on the screen, at 60fps in 24-bit truecolour 1080p, there is really nothing visual to distinguish between the output of an XBox One from a PS4 or a PC. Any game that is produced for the different machines can use exactly the same assets and look identical on all of them.

The primary aim of 3D graphics is to look realistic which is where 3D graphics hardware is converging. The primary aim of 3D audio is to sound realistic which is where 3D audio hardware is converging. The primary aim of vibrating controllers is to feel realistic which is where vibrating controllers are converging. This hardware doesn't have to be used to produce something realistic but it makes sense that it is becoming more and more capable of this. I consider this progress which I would like to see on the Amiga as well.

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

But what i mean is the certain "look" that each computer used to have, that was the result of the hardware limitations, that gave each its own character, which you don't get now. Maybe the XBox One sometimes drops a few frames here and there if there's too much detail, but nobody would see that and think "ah, good old XBone graphics," it's simply an inadequacy.

The look and even sometimes feel was due to hardware limitations. Modern games still have a look and feel just not based on hardware limitations. Take Borderlands, for example, which chose a kind of cartoonish 3D look and used lower resolutions which allows the frame rates to be higher. The game creators have more control to innovate and be artistic without the limitations.

[Mrs Beanbag]

Originally Posted by matthey

The look and even sometimes feel was due to hardware limitations. Modern games still have a look and feel just not based on hardware limitations.

Yes i know that. I deliberately made Puzcat to look like an 8 bit game on the Amiga even though i didn't have to. But all this kind of misses the point. The fact that you could "see" the hardware limitations, it used to actually add something, whereas now if ever you see them, it takes something away. As well, there was something special about the fact that the look and feel was due to the hardware and not just the artist, that you could actually appreciate that there was a hardware there, rendering the graphics, rather than your screen appearing to function as a kind of magic window into an alternate reality. Being able to "see" and "hear" the hardware, i kind of miss that.

[saimon69]

@Mrs Beanbag
Not too dissimilar from the "modern cars got too much electronics" debate, am with you there though

[eXeler0]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

That's partly why people still like to do retro-games, and retro-art as well, i suppose, because it has a character, or some whimsically atmospheric quality that's hard to explain. The hardware itself brings something unique to the result, whereas with the more advanced hardware the limitations don't have anything positive to add anymore. The same goes for sound as for graphics. But not so much for programming, i suppose, since Turing Completeness already happened a long time ago!

I usually prefer SID music over remakes using modern instruments so.... I hear ya... ;-)