[Nishicorn]

and the sample engine works in a much more restrictive way on the SNES motherboard than Paula even though you feed it 16 bit samples.

How the heck do you turn a 'wild claim about Apple IIGS games compared to Amiga games'-thread into just merciless Super Famicom-bashing?

Please chill out. Restrictive way? Come on, Super Famicom's sound chip has DOUBLE the sound channels, 16-bit ADPCM, 32 kHz (Amiga has 22kHz), 16-bit (Amiga has 8-bit sound chip), inbuilt Gaussian interpolation for frequency scaling and modulation, 'echo', noise generation, etc..

Amiga's Paula is a good chip, I have no problem with it, but why do YOU have such a giant problem with everything Super Famicom?

These technical details don't even matter in the end. It only matters what people have done with them, and can't we appreciate different technologies instead of bashing them?

I love Amiga's sound chip, but in many ways, Super Famicom's sound chip IS more capable. What do you mean by 'more restrictive' anyway, can you give examples? What do you mean by 'feed it 16-bit samples'?

Just say you irrationally hate Super Famicom, and be done with it, you don't have to make everything so convoluted and unclear.

The end result is; Amiga has Turrican II musics, Super Famicom has Chrono Trigger. I think Super Famicom wins by hair, but I have no problem enjoying both. Why do you?

SotB to Amiga 1000 is Rescue on Fractalus to Atari 800. The top level is designed around the Amiga. All other versions look like PD games compared to the subtle elegance of the Amiga version. SNES can do SF2 better yes, SotB 1 no.

Why do you have to try to fight against systems instead of just appreciating both for what they are? No one is even making claims that you would have to refute, you seem to just love bashing the Super Famicom for some reason. And it's a great system with wonderful games, musics, atmospheres, etc., so there's no reason to do that.

There's so much to unpack here, I have to do this quote by quote..

SotB to Amiga 1000 is Rescue on Fractalus to Atari 800.

First of all, why Amiga 1000, when most people had Amiga 500s?

Also, how the heck are you comparing a game to a system? Maybe you mean to say something like 'Rescue on Fractalus was better on Atari 800 than on the C64 the same way Shadow of the Beast is better on the Amiga 500 than on the Super Famicom'?

Look, please realize that a bad port doesn't mean anything about a system's capabilities, it's not PROOF.

Even C64's Rescue on Fractalus could've been done a LOT better, it's even missing the intro and other such elements.

These ports are often quick cashgrabs, they're not carefully being crafted to take full advantage of each platform. They make a 'low port' first, then port from that as quickly as possible to other platforms.

The top level is designed around the Amiga.

"around the Amiga"? You mean 'to take advantage of Amiga's capabilities specifically'?

You mean 'the first level' or 'the ground area'?

So what? Who cares how it was designed. And you seem to be admitting that it matters how people design something, instead of it being the system's fault..right?

All other versions look like PD games compared to the subtle elegance of the Amiga version.

How can your claims be taken seriously when you pepper them with this kind of biased, subjective, opinionated dogma?

PD games can look really good, play really well, and sound amazing. What are you talking about? Some of the best games are PD games. Many good games are released as PD games later.

This kind of removes any validity from your post, because ragging on PD scene is an ignorant thing to do, when it has so many gems in it.

What the heck is 'subtle elegance'? It's a computer game. It has no 'subtle elegance'. Sure, it looks and sounds good, it scrolls well, but it also has a tiny screen and washed-out look when it comes to the graphics, and the sprites look like someone glued cut-outs from a paper to a painting. It looks like someone tried to make 'epic graphics', but then decided to go as pastel as they can, and the end result doesn't quite gel.

It has a nice atmosphere sometimes, cool musics and sounds, but 'subtle elegance' is 100% opinion, biased and subjective. Try something more factual, please.

Or.. are you saying that Super Famicom somehow technically blocks 'subtlety' and 'elegance', and thus it's IMPOSSIBLE to make 'subtle elegance' in Super Famicom?

Have you ever even played any Super Famicom games, because I can tell you, the forest song of Chrono Trigger alone has more 'subtle elegance' than Shadow of the Beast can even dream of (whatever 'subtle elegance' means anyway).

I mean, I could talk on this level, too, but what if we just talk about more factual things instead of your hateful, toxic, unfair tirade against a perfectly good, respectable and fun game system, huh?

My points are as follows, and these have no opinionated bashing involved:

- Amiga is a great machine, but it's best to talk about Amiga 500s, since that was the popular machine

- I love Amiga's sound chip

- Super Famicom's sound chip is technically more advanced and can do more, and larger and more 'epic' things - even if its memory is a bit on the low side, and Amiga can sometimes surpass it in other things

- Shadow of the Beast, including its "top level", is perfectly possible and doable on Super Famicom

- Lotus Turbo Challenge 2 would be completely feasible on Super Famicom, but there's no point, since better racing games exist for it already - the difference would be, it could do music AND audio simultaneously due to more sound channels

- Rescue on Fractalus could've been done better on the C64, which means that Top Gear and Shadow of the Beast could've been done better on Super Famicom

- Let's APPRECIATE these systems instead of bashing or focusing on 'what can't be done' - it's a toxic and childish attitude, frankly, when we could look at WHAT HAS BEEN DONE and appreciate that.

Instead of focusing on whether a game could be done on Super Famicom, why not instead play the AMAZINGLY EXCELLENT games that have already been done for Super Famicom, like Ninja Warriors, Chrono Trigger, F-Zero, Super Mario Kart, Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers, Pilot Wings, Super Castlevania IV, Super Bomberman (1-5), Gradius III, Legend of Zelda, Parodius, Kiki Kaikai (1 and 2), Contra III, Megaman games, Starfox, Joe&Mac, Super Aleste or even Desert Strike!

Ok, I know the Amiga version of Desert Strike is better (I hope you feel like a real winner now), but Super Famicom-version is still good, and it's actually slightly faster.

I think it's really weird nitpicking, EVEN if you were correct, to focus SO MUCH on what's 'restrictive' and what 'a system cannot do', when you could rather be actually enjoying what wonderful miracles HAVE been done for the system.

In my opinion, your comments and Super Famicom-bashing does NOT take away these wonderful games and possibilities the Super Famicom offers, so why not rather just ENJOY the Super Famicom experience than bash it?

Enjoying games is better than bashing systems for non-existent games, wouldn't you agree?

(I don't get this platform-based hostility, I love all kinds of different platforms, I love playing Atari 800 games and then hopping to C64 games, I love Atari ST and Amiga, I love Super Famicom and Sega Dreamcast.. why limit yourself and be angry and hateful when you can just ENJOY all these systems? I don't get it, why punish yourself like that?)

P.S. Forgot to mention Magical Drop 2, Uno, Sunset Riders, King of Dragons, Lamborghini: American Challenge (you should like this one), etc..

P.P.S. Forgot to also mention that even the Commodore 64 can do the 'top level' of Shadow of the Beast - saying that C64 can do something Super Famicom can't, is just RIDICULOUS.

P.P.P.S. I should've just said ONE thing against your whole 'Lotus Esprit Turbo Challenge' tirade.. "Nigel Mansell's F1- Challenge". Have you ever SEEN that thing? First of all, it looks and sounds SUPERB. Amiga doesn't have a game like that (Maybe 'Vroom' comes the closest?). It's PLAYABILITY, however, is the most wonderful thing about it, and if you are not convinced of Super Famicom's racing game capabilities after playing that, then nothing can ever convince you, but you'd still be wrong.

To add, look! It has the HOLY GRAIL of racing games; ROADSIDE OBJECTS! Besides having a 'better-looking road-effect', better sense of speed, and yet containing all the elements like tunnels and uphills/downhills, it can also play music WHILE also playing sound effects (what "Lotus Esprit Turbo Challenge"-game can do that?). It also seems the framerate is higher, but I could be wrong.

Now do you see the ludicrousness of claiming 'Super Famicom can't do roadside objects' (and why would it not be able to do it, and why claim something so ARBITRARY?)