Uglifying graphics in Amiga games! (Joke)

[switchblade]

What happens when you take certain games using the Amiga's color usage (16, 32, 128, or whatever), and you transform them into the same 16 colors used in that ghastly EGA graphic mode on PC's back then?

You get some REALLY UGLY LOOKING Amiga games! Just check out Jim Power here:

[switchblade]

And now check out Lionheart:

(Sacrilegious, ain't it?)

[s2325]

You may just try to play Jim Power or Shadow of the Beast for Atari ST.

[switchblade]

Funny you should say that. I highly doubt Beast on Atari ST would ever look so bad compared to what it would look like (or just barely look like) on the PC's 16 color EGA graphics:

(Remember folks, Beast was displaying 128 colors on-screen compared to either 16 or 32 colors for Amiga games. So can you imagine how difficult it would be to downgrade 128 colors into terrible-looking 16 colors? Not that hard!)

[switchblade]

Added two extra shots for Beast 1:

[s2325]

Atari ST Shadow of the Beast is ugly on LCD monitor because of less colors but it's ok on CRT display with blur and scanlines.

[Megol]

I'm not sure you are doing a fair comparison, do you select 16 colors from the 64 available?

But I agree EGA isn't pretty, it's better than CGA though.

[switchblade]

Not a fair comparison at all, considering that all those shots were taken through a pixel shader in WinUAE.

I got the shader from a custom DOSBox fork. Shader is called EGAfilter.fx

Considering both WinUAE and Daum's DOSBox SVN version both utilize pixel shaders with the .FX suffix, I could easily interchange shaders between both emulators.

So, no. None of my shots are anywhere near accurate as to what OCS games would look like with an EGA palette.

Still, it's a pretty fun way to relieve some boredom, is it not?

[s2325]

Originally Posted by s2325

Atari ST Shadow of the Beast is ugly on LCD monitor because of less colors but it's ok on CRT display with blur and scanlines.

[ Show youtube player ]