In what ways SNES is more capaable than an A500?

[Seiya]

In native game Amiga could be very great competitor with some Consoles like Mega Drive, but in porting from Arcade or other systems is very in difficulty.
Amiga sound is another big problem because not only you have an audio chip with 4 channels, but it hasn't the memory to manage sounds.
In many Amiga games you listen to very great instruments quality, but in many of these ones you only listen to arrangements that repeat at libitum, very simple melody, some times only arrangments.

Amiga was developped with in mind 512k Chip RAM in the 80% of his games and in these ones many of them limited at 16/32 colors, limited palette etc, etc.

Amiga has, however, a very good skill: to use dual or more playfield and give some more extra in native games (produced only for Amiga).

On old "The One" Amiga Magazine there is a nice developers interview about Super Street Fighter II: The New Challengers from initial SNES source and various problems

[Tigerskunk]

Hmm, dunno. Used an Amiga from 1987 to 1992. And then bought myself a SNES in 1994, and the action games just were so much better there (played Super Mario World, F-Zero, Mortal Kombat 2, Street Fighter2, Donkey Kong Country, Mythic Quest, Zelda ALLTP, Yoshis Island and Killer Instinct on it). And looked a lot better as well.
I missed playing the adventure and strategy stuff on my Amiga, though.

[idrougge]

Originally Posted by pink^abyss

I don't like the muffled sound too, tho i think a fair share come from bad samples in the first place. I like that the SPC takes all work from the CPU and gives you 8 channels with panning. It serves much better for games in my view then Paula.
I think a good mixture of Amiga and SNES audio is GBA audio as produced from GAX. Aliased 8bit wavetables, but with reverb and 8 channels

Was Iridion 2 GAX? That’s some of my favourite game music.

[d4rk3lf]

Originally Posted by Steril707

I missed playing the adventure and strategy stuff on my Amiga, though.

Indeed.
For me personally, the lack of Settlers, Civilization, K240, Dune 1 and 2, Goblins, Simon, and many other strategy and adventure games, is way to much that any console can replace any Amiga, even I like action games too.
I was very lucky, because one of my all time favorite (action type) game Mortal Kombat 2, got a really nice port on the Amiga.
Besides, Amiga in it's library have a decent amount of quality action packed games too.

[dreadnought]

Actually, SNES has a very decent Civilization port. Used to play it on my PSP emu, works very well as a portable Civ.

[Tigerskunk]

Originally Posted by d4rk3lf

Besides, Amiga in it's library have a decent amount of quality action packed games too.

Yep, but game play wise not really comparable to the top SNES stuff though, imo.

[Seiya]

of course Console games are usally different from Computer ones: on computers like Amiga you can play more genres like adventure, simulation. On SNES you find much more platforms and action games

[Torti-the-Smurf]

"Best" Action is on Mega-Drive ; "best" RPG´s and Zelda likes are on SNES.

Those Consoles had a very distinct character and it show in there game library.

So, any "platform" did had its strength´s and weaknesses. That made them so interesting.

[Adropac2]

I think when Amiga devs tried to mimick console games even when exclusive to the machine it tended to come off as worse comparitively for obvious reasons. There's absolutely no denying the best action based stuff was always on the Snes. The pedigree of talent too certainly made for some utter brilliance on the machine. Proffesional in a way a lot of stuff on Amiga tended to feel bedroom coding still

But there's a feel to every machine and the Amiga always felt alive and warm to me as if you'd settled in to this cosy relaxing enviroment. Snes was brilliant but different in a way that meant I use the Snes less but never moved on from using the Amiga. The Snes felt like an arcade machine in comparison but the nature of the Amiga being a still very capable computer at the time meant you could sit back and relax in a different state of feel to the consoles. It's why I think people still love the great machine so much because it has so much character on top of the very good selection of uniqe games

And again the resolution I would say allows for a slightly nicer look overal

[kremiso]

Originally Posted by Adropac2

...And again the resolution I would say allows for a slightly nicer look overal

absolutely, to not talk of the overscan games

also, i was wondering if the snes had some limits in parallax layers, as max number
ie i'm thinking at Lionheart, cannot remember something so extreme on snes

the megadrive had Flink, the snes... ok maybe Jim Power

[dreadnought]

Resolution does not matter that much, when most of the games had borders - even in NTSC. That's another big point for SNES, that most of its games were written for NTSC and ran fast in 60Hz plus filled the screen properly.

Also, hardware enabled features don't matter that much when it comes to the overall game design and gameplay. I think it's safe to say most people would rather play Metroid or Castlevania than Lionheart.

[roondar]

Originally Posted by dreadnought

Resolution does not matter that much, when most of the games had borders - even in NTSC. That's another big point for SNES, that most of its games were written for NTSC and ran fast in 60Hz plus filled the screen properly.

Except most of us Amiga users were in PAL land and thus didn't get 60Hz, nor a full screen with the SNES (but we did get the odd full screen Amiga game). The admittedly few Amiga users in NTSC land got both 60Hz and more full screen Amiga games.

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by roondar

Except most of us Amiga users were in PAL land and thus didn't get 60Hz, nor a full screen with the SNES (but we did get the odd full screen Amiga game).

Well, that's too bad for us Amiga PAL users, eh? But it doesn't change the fact that the overwhelming majority of SNES games were coded for NTSC and Amiga's for PAL and you can't avoid it when comparing the two systems. Those with deeper pockets could (and did) import these games and ran them on multisystem TVs, which by 1995 weren't that rare.

[roondar]

Originally Posted by dreadnought

Well, that's too bad for us Amiga PAL users, eh?

Nah, it's too bad for the SNES PAL users. They got (usually anyway) better games, but they also got slower versions with massive borders. That was what console user life in the early 1990's was like in PAL areas. The picture you're painting is not at all realistic.

But it doesn't change the fact that the overwhelming majority of SNES games were coded for NTSC and Amiga's for PAL and you can't avoid it when comparing the two systems. Those with deeper pockets could (and did) import these games and ran them on multisystem TVs, which by 1995 weren't that rare.

Comparing across regions (i.e. PAL to NTSC) is misguided at best. In fact, the best way I have to explain how this "let's only compare when it's to my advantage" style of argument comes across to me, is to paraphrase yourself from a while back:

Originally Posted by dreadnought, paraphrased

I knew we're going to end up with this old NTSC chestnut. SNESie fans will never yield even an inch, because their machine has to be the best at everything

The fact of life is that virtually no one actually had a NTSC SNES over here, so claiming they were relevant in the PAL market reeks of either severe ignorance or letting fanboyism cloud your judgement.

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by roondar

In fact, the best way I have to explain how this "let's only compare when it's to my advantage" style of argument comes across to me, is to paraphrase yourself from a while back

Judging by the tone of your first reply, I had a hunch that this is a little bit more than our usual back & forths, which in most cases so far had been amicable & fun. But the above explains it rather well - you simply still can't let go of some weeks (if not months) old argument about C64, which is pretty disappointing. I didn't take you for a person who holds grudges, especially seeing as that was just another forgettable and (for me at least) lighthearted exchange.

Originally Posted by roondar

The fact of life is that virtually no one actually had a NTSC SNES over here, so claiming they were relevant in the PAL market reeks of either severe ignorance or letting fanboyism cloud your judgement.

Since now we have some background to this "argument", sure, go ahead if you want to claim that water is dry & that the impact of video systems on how entire game libraries were shaped & perceived (now, then, whatever) is irrelvant. The reason has left the building some time ago, so now it does not really matter.

And the charge of "fanboyism" is rather odd coming from somebody who clearly started this argument because of hurt feelings over his favourite micro, and aimed at somebody who wrote as far as one page back:

Originally Posted by dreadnought

I chose Amiga and would do so again, even if somebody offered me a SNES with 100 top games free

Yeah, totally rabid SNES fanboi here...smh.

[Torti-the-Smurf]

The very low Resolution was ok for slower Games.

Alot of SNes Games did whip the Screen around, when the Player turned left or right.

This and the zoomed in Look made me dizzy sometimes.

If you compare any Game that is also on Amiga , Snes and Mega-Drive, the SNes has alwayst the lowest resolution and you want to see what lies ahead, in a fast moving game

Zool is almost unplayable on the Snes imho. Slower games like Castlevania where great tho.

The Snes was THE RPG and Zelda like powerhouse BUT also did had other Stuff,
the Mega-Drive on the other Hand was alsmost the completly opposite.

Man, those machines where so distinctive and as a result had such a unique gaming library ; which i really liked

[roondar]

Yeah, that post of mine was a mistake. Sorry. Anyway, I'm not going to edit it now - that would be rather silly. Instead, I'll just leave the thread and not add more mistakes. Two in one day was enough.

[d4rk3lf]

Originally Posted by dreadnought

Actually, SNES has a very decent Civilization port. Used to play it on my PSP emu, works very well as a portable Civ.

Oh.. that's really nice then...
Civilization (imho) is one of the games that really can make a huge difference, because of unmatched replayability potential.
That's one HUGE point for Snes.

O know about Dune 2, on Genesis... in fact... I played it, and finished it as Harkonnens. I expected that I'll never get used to pad, instead of mouse... but somehow.. it didn't bothered me too much... It's a really nice port, imho.

Originally Posted by Steril707

Yep, but game play wise not really comparable to the top SNES stuff though, imo.

Never had Snes to play around, out of my friends, but wasn't really that much interested in it, but I trust your judgment.
For me, Ruff'n'Tumble is a game that really is top notch action platform game experience, that I think even Snes, or even arcades would be proud to have.
After I saw it (as a kid), I said.. so there you go... a real arcade quality platformer (even tho, some other platformers are also amazing).

Originally Posted by Torti-the-Smurf

Man, those machines where so distinctive and as a result had such a unique gaming library ; which i really liked

Yeah man... this is so true.
Today's games (I mean AAA games, not indie), looks similar like egg to egg.

[Photon]

Just like arcade PCBs, it had some custom chips, not general-purpose ones like in Amiga, but special-purpose for games, with pre-orchestrated functions and narrow limits.

These very special-purpose chips could project 1 texture (the "ground" in Mario Kart), it could display many sprites, and it could add reverb-ish effects to sound.

These are the ways in which the consumer hardware was more capable for games.

On the other hand, despite being 5 years newer, it was much less capable than Amiga because it had no storage, expandability, or usable high-resolution mode for graphics, text, or native development/creativity; a console, not a computer.

As a result there was also much less software than for a computer, and some software increases a platform's capabilities a hundredfold, while a severe lack of it sharply limits what can be done on it.

Typically, all you can do even today is boot a game created on a computer and play it. (Provided you want to play only the certain types of games it supports: a 2D game with many sprites, or a pseudo-3D game with 1 flat texture as ground. A 3D game like a flight sim or space game, for example, would be beyond its capabilities.)

[freehand]

Originally Posted by Photon

On the other hand, despite being 5 years newer, it was much less capable than Amiga because it had no storage, expandability, or usable high-resolution mode for graphics, text, or native development/creativity; a console, not a computer.

As a result there was also much less software than for a computer, and some software increases a platform's capabilities a hundredfold, while a severe lack of it sharply limits what can be done on it.

Typically, all you can do even today is boot a game created on a computer and play it. (Provided you want to play only the certain types of games it supports: a 2D game with many sprites, or a pseudo-3D game with 1 flat texture as ground. A 3D game like a flight sim or space game, for example, would be beyond its capabilities.)

Have you read the thread ?