When was the best time to buy an Amiga?

[demether]

used or new ? For used ones, early 2000, late 90 was definitly the time here in France. You could find a perfect condition 1200 for around 70euros...sometimes less.

[AestheticDebris]

I'd say '89 was the peak time, the Batman pack was probably the best time. Games were starting to target the Amiga first and the titles that were seen as the cutting edge were still very strong on Amiga hardware.

[spannernick]

For me the best time was 1995/6 they were like £30 then not £200 on ebay like now and you could find Amigas at carboot sales then.

[jamielemon]

Originally Posted by Zak

Definitely 1987! Yes, you'd pay more, but you would gain a longer time period for it at which your Amiga would be state of the art and the best you can get. Wouldn't you want to live that feeling as long as possible? The games available at the time were already great! Just a few examples out of my head: Defenders of the Cown, Flight Simulator II, Leaderboard Golf, Ports of Call, Silent Service, Test Drive, Vader, Winter Games, World Games. You could also make music with Sonix and paint pictures with Deluxe Paint. I think that would already make some nice evenings. And the times are the best, when the expected future is even better.

Lots of people taking this angle and I totally get it.However the only disadvantage (apart from price) that I can think of is that by the time the all-time Amiga classics start appearing around 1991 your machine is going to be slightly outdated. Not even sure if this is a problem (were there games that needed Kick 1.3 or above) and of course you could always upgrade. But something to consider!

[TCD]

Originally Posted by jamielemon

Lots of people taking this angle and I totally get it.However the only disadvantage (apart from price) that I can think of is that by the time the all-time Amiga classics start appearing around 1991 your machine is going to be slightly outdated.

That is an interesting remark given that all the classics were meant to run on the original A500 and some even needed help running on the later ECS models (A500+ and A600). You might need a 512k RAM expansion to play some games, but other than that the 'outdated' part seems to be not a problem at all.

[jamielemon]

Originally Posted by TCD

That is an interesting remark given that all the classics were meant to run on the original A500 and some even needed help running on the later ECS models (A500+ and A600). You might need a 512k RAM expansion to play some games, but other than that the 'outdated' part seems to be not a problem at all.

I couldn't remember if this was the case to be honest. I know a lot of games stared to required 1MB as standard after the A500+ came out but I couldn't remember if they also needed newer versions of Kickstart.

[TCD]

Originally Posted by jamielemon

I know a lot of games stared to required 1MB as standard after the A500+ came out but I couldn't remember if they also needed newer versions of Kickstart.

While almost no games after 1991 needed KS 2.+, older games would potentially cause issues (which matter if you bought budget versions or compilations). Basically with the exception of AGA graphics you'd be fine with your 1987 A500 purchase plus a 512k memory expansion up until Commodore went under in 1994 regarding games

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by TCD

Basically with the exception of AGA graphics you'd be fine with your 1987 A500 purchase plus a 512k memory expansion up until Commodore went under in 1994 regarding games

That's true, baring maybe the disk juggling in some games. And aside from few notable titles there wasn't much exciting stuff in the AGA world either.

Source: somebody who was stuck with A500 till ~1996

[TCD]

Ah yes, the 'joy' of playing any vs. fighting game on an A500 springs to mind

[Megalomaniac]

Quite a few later games needed an A500+ (or at least ECS or 1Mb Chip RAM) to run - Bloodnet, Super Tennis Champs, Super Skidmarks. Tubular Worlds was totally silent without 1Mb chip RAM I think too. Plus there were games which benefitted from 2Mb of chip RAM (or 2Mb of any RAM) which was a much easier upgrade on the Plus or A600 (Worms had more terrains, and Walker / Hired Guns / Settlers had better music). I'm not sure if you could upgrade a really early 1.2 A500 into full A500+ spec including 2Mb of chip RAM? I don't think 1.3 added much beyond being able to boot directly from a hard drive (Dune II's box says it needs at least 1.3 but I'm not sure this is true?)

Either way, I still don't think you needed an Amiga before 1989 from a purely games perspective (for serious use you needed a 16-bit by then, though not necessarily an Amiga), especially if you had an 8-bit that was still well-supported that you hadn't totally exhausted. Even if you had a BBC or Atari 8-bit which were getting outdated by 1987, getting one of the 'big three' 8-bits (from a UK perspective that's Amstrad, C64 and Spectrum, alphabetical order) to tide you over for 2 years, the A500 came down £100 in that time, and in 1988 you'd get more fun out of £200 worth of Amstrad/C64/Spectrum games than £200 worth of Amiga games, unless you chose very wisely or were totally bored of what the 8-bits could do.

[TCD]

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

Quite a few later games needed an A500+ (or at least ECS or 1Mb Chip RAM) to run

That statement is at best misleading. If by 'later games' you mean 1995+ then yes, some of those needed an A500+ or better to run. 1995 is also the year that released games for the Amiga drop below 500 per year. So after Commodore went bust some OCS/ECS games required more than a stock A500 with RAM expansion. I'm sure that at that time especially used A500+ could be picked up for quite little money if you really wanted to play those games.

[Megalomaniac]

Fair point, you did say 'up to 1994'. Star Trek 25th Anniversary was about the first which needed A500+ features, and that needed an accelerator and a hard drive too (and was marketed as completely A1200 only). Still a shame that you'd've missed out on those last few games (and there are others I didn't mention). This is at least partially true of even the latest ECS A500s from 1991 as well, of course. And yes, the option of getting a second-hand A500+/A600 (maybe even A1200 for a bit more) was there - and, of course, if you'd had an Amiga since 1987 you were probably ready for something new, be it PC or hanging on until the Playstation launched (mid-1995 here).

[tolkien]

Anytime is good to buy an Amiga!

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

Quite a few later games needed an A500+ (or at least ECS or 1Mb Chip RAM) to run - Bloodnet, Super Tennis Champs, Super Skidmarks. Tubular Worlds was totally silent without 1Mb chip RAM I think too. Plus there were games which benefitted from 2Mb of chip RAM (or 2Mb of any RAM) which was a much easier upgrade on the Plus or A600 (Worms had more terrains, and Walker / Hired Guns / Settlers had better music). I'm not sure if you could upgrade a really early 1.2 A500 into full A500+ spec including 2Mb of chip RAM? I don't think 1.3 added much beyond being able to boot directly from a hard drive (Dune II's box says it needs at least 1.3 but I'm not sure this is true?)

These are minor details, really and regard a handful of games. For the likes of Bloodnet you'd need AGA+HDD to do it justice anyway. Also, wasn't A500+ incompatible with some games?

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

Either way, I still don't think you needed an Amiga before 1989 from a purely games perspective (for serious use you needed a 16-bit by then, though not necessarily an Amiga), especially if you had an 8-bit that was still well-supported that you hadn't totally exhausted.

This (again) seems to ignore the importance of "computer" games, ie strategy/CRPG/sim etc. By 1988 Amiga already had a lot of them, and even if they were more often than not ports from 8 bits or ST, they'd often end up the best version.

Case in point: The Faery Tale Adventure, which did get the C64 port but due to it's slow FDD was virtually unplayable.

Sure, if the financials were tight you could probably survive a bit longer with an 8-bit machine, but for a gamer with a budget Amiga was already quite attractive even back then.

[TCD]

Originally Posted by dreadnought

Also, wasn't A500+ incompatible with some games?

Yep. Of course there were ways to make most of them work, but 'out of the box' (way) more OCS/ECS games won't work with the A500+ or A600 than with the A500.

[Amigajay]

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

Fair point, you did say 'up to 1994'. Star Trek 25th Anniversary was about the first which needed A500+ features, and that needed an accelerator and a hard drive too (and was marketed as completely A1200 only).

Are you certain that works on ECS? States AGA 256 colours only, despite CPU and memory requirements archiveable on A500+. Not seen anyone state this game working on non AGA before?

[Megalomaniac]

Fair point, for sims/adventure/strategy the Amiga (and ST) overhauled the 8-bits earlier, especially from a UK perspective where most 8-bit users had tapes rather than disks. An A500 cost £1000 in today's money at that time though, so it was definitely 'a budget' that may have been beyond most players (or their parents), especially as the games cost more too - but yes, by even 1988 there were benefits to having one. However, for these genres the ST looked to be just as good initially, especially as it was cheaper and/or came with loads of games, whereas longer term an Amiga proved to be a better buy for games (and graphics or video production). By 1989 it was much clearer which 16-bit you should get.

The A500+ incompatibility issues did get resolved with Relokick about a year after the A500+ launched, or a ROM sharer for a cost much earlier. Lots of games got fixed officially too (e.g. SWIV / Lotus 1 / Bubble Bobble / Midwinter). For serious stuff the A500+ was a better machine almost immediately. With hindsight, people probably over-reacted at the time, although it's understandable.

[Amigajay]

Originally Posted by Megalomaniac

With hindsight, people probably over-reacted at the time, although it's understandable.

I don’t think people over-reacted at all, especially when Commodore hid the A500+ in plain sight and neglected to inform anyone until people thought why is this game not working! I know i would have been pissed! Yes nice to get extra 512k and newer OS/WB but not at the expense of a good chunk of games not working! I’d rather pay the £25 quid for the 512k upgrade myself and keep full compatibility!

[dreadnought]

I see in The One that in Dec 1988 you could get A500 for 400 quid. Meanwhile C64+FDD would be about 320. No brainer

[TCD]

Originally Posted by Amigajay

I’d rather pay the £25 quid for the 512k upgrade myself and keep full compatibility!

I pity the poor sods that bought the A500+ thinking they'd get a newer and better machine for gaming just to find out that some of their old games won't work anymore and new games looked and played exactly like on the A500.