Back then it sounds and looks like the Amiga kicked the PC's butt and thereason why is the PC couldn't do as much back then and they were over 1,000 dollars while the Commodore was 500$ or below.
The commodore 64 could actually do those graphics of the Amiga if done with the right programmers. However. most C64 games were done by people in their own garage to make a few bucks..
My heart goes with the Amiga no matter what. Even though I've used them for everyday use between the late 90's until I got this iMac the PC has never been my favorite system at any point in time, especially not for gaming. It's like the PC could be summed up by 3 genres whilst the Amiga did a bit of everything and beyond.
What is silly about this video is that most PC gamers weren't playing Amiga style platform games. None of these PC games were hits, because us PC gamers were playing games like Darklands, (a cRPG), or Flight Sims like Gunship 2000, strategy games like Dune and especially adventure games like the Infocom titles!
wrath of the demons music is nearly identical to shadow of the beast..also the 'punching' of the flyers of this game looks so shadow of the beast...EPIC times!
I don't really see what this video is trying to show since both variations of each game are almost identical, this doesn't look like a consummate victory on either side. I wouldn't say the same side wins on every occasion. Makes it look about 50/50 to me.
@zakkattakk89 Ok, well for one thing, the person who made this 'demo' must have gone to some trouble to find a PC with the lowest spec soundcard on the market. Secondly, I don't think much of the Amiga music and sound effects either, and trying to hurl insults, like most Amiga users, is not persuasive it just makes you look like a jerk. meanwhile, if a PC user made the same demo, it would spin things the other way:
@zakkattakk89 Nope. You and your Amiga friends are wrong about the differences between PCs and Amigas. Once Compaq released the 32-bit 386, in 1986, there was no longer any competition from the Amiga. The comparisons are usually made by Amiga owners, who tend to compare the worst of the PC versus the best of the Amiga. The "PC" it demonstrates doesn't exist except as a selection of cheap hardware and bad games. Real PCs looked more like this... "/watch?v=mYuR8hsoCCk&feature=related" go to 3:24
@vapourmile i agree completely as someone who owns both systems (amiga 500+), the comparison especially very early pc games are shown not using the top graphics mode and show cga graphics and pc speaker instead of using a proper sound card which were avilable in the mid 80's and ega graphics.
but it dosent stop with comparisions with the pc but includes biased not comparing like models with like with the archemidies and atari st's
im the proud owner of a archemidies 3010 and a ste
@vapourmile nice to do comparisions, but the comparisions have to be fair.
dont compare a 64k amstrad version of hard drivin, with a 128k version on the spectrum, the 64k version loses sound and drops frame rate, the 128k version adds sound and the frame rate increase, makes a big difference to the comparison.
main critisim is too many comparisons are using pc speaker rather than using a sound card, and remember the pc was a buisness machine not a consumer level machine in the 80's
Terminator 2 The movie was made in Newtek Lightwave and Opalvision and SC. Remember... The videogame Terminator 2 includes a fee frames from the movie and surprise!!! in two 3.5 diskettes. Amiga Forever.
No surprise at all, PC was designed as an office computer, Amiga rather as a gaming machine. Pity you haven't compared Robocop or Barbarian 1 (on PC entitled Deathsword). From the other side if you compare Amiga OS4 to Windows 7, there's no talk at all.
I would say the 386, while much closer to the Amiga than PCs had been before, still wasn't fully up there with Amigas.
Well, 386 machines were better for certain kinds of games, while Amigas were still better at other games... such as really fast paced, multilayered scrolling action games.
@laffer35 Totally agree. I remember playing Gunship 2000 on my Amiga and seeing it on a mates 286 16mhz and laughing my head off at how crappy and slow it was.. and the Amiga couldn't even do 3d that well!
@laffer35 Is it possible to make a PC MS-DOS title with SNES quality graphics and multilayered backgrounds with some neat lighting effects (As seen in the SNES version of Earthworm Jim) and have it runnable on a 286 with VGA? (Maybe even a game that uses 320x240 or 360x240) and maybe a 6 channel half OPL2, half MOD Sample soundtrack?
If so, then which programming language should it be written in for best speed and least MEMORY usage?
I think you have the timeline a bit messed up. Intel released 386 processor in 1985, and it was mainstream in homes in late 80s. I got my first gaming PC in 1991 which had a 486DX-33Mhz, and by then 486 processors were quite meanstream already. 386 were low-end.
Even then, Amiga could still achieve better 2D scrolling games, but PC was much more powerful for 3D and pseudo-3D games like Wing Commander 1-2, Ultima Underworld 1-2, Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, flight combat simulators etc.
@Zenon66 Nah, 286's were when the PC's pulled ahead with better speed, graphics and sound. Wolfenstein 3D ran 70 frames per second on a 12 MHz 286. All the Sierra and LucasArts games looked infinitely better on 286 VGA, compared to the grainy Amiga versions.
Loved my Amigas (500 & 2000), no doubt about that. If you compared Ghosts´n Goblins on Amiga vs PC you could see an even more dramatic difference. BUT as soon as VGA and Soundblaster became available for the PC, Amiga´s demise became inevitable. Even if there have been thousands(!) of games available for the Amiga, very few(!) really rocked (come on, be honest to yourself...). The tons of Amiga-demos available back then - blowing you away back in 87 - also became more and more boring in the end.
@Wutdahellisdis He's talking about PC vs Amiga. Any modern PC and any modern Amiga can watch the video just fine. Any old Amiga won't be able to, just as any old PC won't be able to either, from the same age. You can't compare a 68030/50 to a modern PC. You have to compare it with a PC from 1993 or so. So his point isn't valid (his point being PC can watch it and Amiga can't).
I grew up with a PC but i would love to get my hands on an Amiga one day. I played it too but different games i had on PC.
btw recently i was trying out some emulators to see different versions of the same game and Lost Vikings is best on the SNES it has background in every level, while on PC an Amiga was only black.
I think they were just being lazy and did not program them in.
AMIGA > PC ... forever! Omg how much hours I used to spend in this game....never completed it was too young... ill play it again when I`ll get the chance....AMIGA FTW!
frame rate, pixelpitch/AA and the overall colour scheme used the Amiga rocked!! compared to the pc..... sound/music the Amiga was and IS ! UNBEATABLE!!
@KiranaForever You could have shown some point'n'click adventure games. The PC with its hard disk and perhaps a Roland MT-32, versus an Amiga with a hard disk too.
It's still irritating to think that with some of the best consumer hardware and software on the market, along with a rock solid user base, Commodore still managed to screw up.
My A500 was a beloved possession however I made the mistake of also buying a CD32 when they came out. They were capable machines, but too underpowered for the war that was raging amongst formats by then. On hindsight I should have jumped ship to PC at that point, but I still believed Amiga would be the future. *sigh*
Yes, the Amiga was indeed way ahead of its time when it came out. Compare a 1989 Amiga game with the same title on the PC and the difference is obvious.
However, by 1992 the Amiga had become largely obsolete. The popularization of the SVGA, CD-ROMs and the SoundBlater pretty much ended the Amiga dominance in terms of multi-media and graphics . RIP AMIGA.
I have no bias towards any one particular computing platform, bus as far as this video goes the Amiga was clearly the better machine on a like-for-like basis. Nicely done by the way!
@laffer35 Amiga was way better of the PC in 2D gaming, and from 1987 (the year when the A500 came out and the majority of the gamers could afford the system) to 1991 it was the system of choice for computer videogaming. But when the intel 486 became affordable the software renderers on the IBM PC could do almost the same things that did the Amiga hardware, and with more amount of RAM games like Ultima Underworld, Wolfenstein, Doom, etc., became feasible on PC but not on Amiga (at the time).
@laffer35 Said that, I'm not arguing that the IBM PC was superior with his software rendering approach at gaming. Rather, from 1994 also on the PC became prevalent the hardware rendering (thanks to 3dfx Glide, later by Direct 3D and OpenGL on Windows) that made the C=64 and Amiga machines at the top of their era. Transform & Lightning in fact brought to the extremes the concept of video chip like Denise on the Amiga OCS machines.
@laffer35 So, in fact, the main reason under the Amiga loss in market was the bad management at Commodore. In 1990 came out the ECS that wasn't really an upgrade to OCS, and AGA came too late, two years the bankruptcy for Commodore. When the AAA chipset, the real "next generation" for Amiga, came near completion it was simple too obsolete to compete with PC in 1993/1994, so it was abandoned. If Amiga had AGA in 1989 and a 3D capable AAA in 1993 perhaps today would still be a mainstream computer.
@HipHop1981 This is clearly a comparison of the games available on both platforms. Doom/Wolfenstein were not released for both platforms...... duh.... The amiga was way ahead of its time
@HipHop1981 The different nature of the chip-sets and the way pixels are organised, really. The 286 was slightly faster than a 68000 running at the same clock frequency, which gave it a boost on polygon games. 386 pcs came out 2 years later for home PCS, just a year or so after the first Amiga and was just under 3 times faster, clock for clock, though they were expensive.
@HipHop1981 PCs could do 'chunky' graphics (bits defining each pixel were packed together, instead of planes (planar) which were more suited for games like Wolfenstein.The Amiga strength were its chipsets. The 'Denise' graphics chip and the 'Agnus' with its 'Blitter' and 'Copper' subcomponents were fantastic at handling 2D.
@HipHop1981 Because running Wolf 3D or Doom in 1992 would have required spending $5000 for your PC. Not many people could afford that, and chose the $500 Amiga instead
..
Also worth noting it was not PC that was used to make Star Trek, Babylon 5, or seaQuest. special effects It was the Amiga (with video toaster) because of its superior graphics
man....amiga sound is like sex to me. Yeah I am nerd but f*** it. The music in most of the game on there is so amazing that I am almost drooling.I need to find some of these soundtracks. For only 4 channels this beast had the best sound ever heard coming from a PC. Amiga was/is the gaming GOD of PC gaming hands down.
Wonderful choice of games that were compared. Think that the traditional PC got an undeserved treatment though since basic PC did not include a soundcard. It would have been even more interesting if this wonderful comparison would have compared the traditional PC vs. the Amiga as StraightOutofTheBox. Needless to say the trad. PC would have sounded horrible to say the least.
Is anybody in position to compare trad. PC vs. Amiga?:
By the early 90's the PC with 256 color vga graphic cards had caught up quite a bit with the Amiga although the sounds were still not so good even with a sound card (musical sounds for sound effects). In the 80's though the PC with it's 16 color EGA and buzzer sound was no match for the Amiga.
@Dethmeister the soundblaster originally came out in the 80s for 8 bit ISA, if you buy the original soundblaster it will install in a model 5150 ibm pc. :) although you want Soundblaster 2.0 which also was for 8 bit isa, it had better sound.
yeah, see, if you have a game that takes advantage of EGA or VGA, you get much better graphics. of course a game using CGA is not going to look as good as amiga. :)
correction i personally moved to pc about 96, and duke nukem had came out
the amiga had died without any hope of reserection in 94. and the atari was to die in 98
but we knew it wasnt capable to compete in 92, when id released wolfenstein 3d, and the 3-4 years no real competator game came out the st or amiga ranks, i was later cause i was an st user so with atari being sold in 98 after a failed merger to keep it afloat in 96, so when i moved atari was still there.
@cant1rac Well considering the A1200 came out in 1992, it "could" compete with Wolvenstein 3D due to the likes of AB3D and Genetic Species that came later, although with Genetic Species it did require an 030 to run well but then most PC users had to upgrades to run newer 3D games as well. If Commodore had of stuck around and released the AAA chipset with a faster CPU during those years then yes it could have competed but as you said, they died out in 94 and that was the end.
@cant1rac Where MANY Amiga stuffed up COMPLETELY was literally refusing to upgrade their Amiga's with faster CPU's more memory..etc.. whilst with PC users they were more than happy to fork out for upgrades to run newer 3D titles. Many companies were trying to push the boundaries of 3D texture mapped games on the Amiga but hen by that time Commodore was bankrupt and people couldn't find any incentive to upgrade a Computer that was going to slowly die out.
@cant1rac I think another problem might have been that Amiga users during the early years hadn't a need to updgrade because the Amiga was so damn powerful and with polygon 3D many games even with a faster CPU didn't see an increase in frame rate due to the blitter.
@cant1rac No, standard Amiga's couldn't put out something like Doom but then either could a standard bare bones PC, but then with the PC there wasn't any "standard". In 1992 with an 030 CPU the Amiga "could" run Doom smoothly (I ran it on my Amiga 1200 with an 030 CPU), it just required people to do upgrades to their Amiga's like PC users did so it could gain some of those titles.
upgraded a 1200 was and is a very capable computer.
ive seen amiga 1200 run quake 2 very effectively with the appropriate upgrades. think its a real shame computers like atari st's and amigas died out.
imagine how good say a ps3 would be with a built in keyboard full computer system and desktop applications photoeditors office software etc and the gaming ablity.
with the disgraceful drm on pc's currently, id certainly buy such a solution over a pc
i say its great for what most people used it for, and thats what i use mine for!
as a games machine?
doing serious music, desktop publishing, photography, the st and apple's were far superiour machines.
well until the amiga 1200 and then that amiga is really worthy for the over the top religious worshiping, cause that amiga and no other was really some machine for its time.. hey and i want one cause its a fantastic piece of kit.
yeah i got a work bench, but its needs loaded in, why are amigians religious about it.
yeah it was the slightly better than an st for games
serious audio work forget it, cubase midi ports, im a musician (no contest) graphics, i did photography to degree level, sorry st was better
its main competion in thoughs areas, wasnt amiga, it was apple
you call that massive external power pack, the heath robbinson mess of a modulator and pass through cables, no re-set switch, on the a-500, a pro machine ?
The AMIGA was a far better machine and still is today in many respects, deffinately easier to set up for your own requirements via the amazing amount of awesome software most of which is free or shareware, shame there'll never be a new one.
the reason the pc was not as good as a amiga back then was it was never considered to be a gaming system.
so even the c64 titles of games like stunt car racer, pc versions were awful.
i hate how amiga fans try and trouse everything, i own one it had a joke of a box and pass through cable no work bench pre loaded
amiga fixed it wih the 1200. try comparing say games from 92-95 the life of the 1200 not the 1980's cause really you could show better games on a atari 2600, its a crap argument
Nice documentation where the PC continually improved its graphic and sound capabilities where the Amiga didn't get any significant hardware improvements because of some sleeping Commodore managers...
love this video u made, so retro, i was very very jealous at the AMIGA in the mid 80's cuz i used the MSX and MSX 2 machines and bought the PC XT-86 with EGA 16 colors, and every time i go to get a copy of a game in the game shop and watch some demos of the AMIGA games,,, boils my blood, BUT i had to say AMIGA was the BEST machine there is at that time. THX
On a technical side, the problem for Amiga was that while some advanced Amiga versions emerged, games were still designed for plain vanilla A500. A1200/AGA support was outdated already when it arrived.
On PC, games constantly used better hardware, better graphics, better controllers (analog flight sticks), better music hardware (even the pricey Roland LAPC-1/MT-32). So also on technical side, PC was running away from Amiga ever since Wing Commander (1990). 2D platform games aside.
The main problem with Amiga was that unlike PC games, Amiga games didn't evolve (Zool, Magic Pockets, Gods... WTH???). If you wanted to play 2D platform jumping or shooter games, SNES and Sega Genesis were better platforms for kiddie games.
PC, on the other hand, got some really mindblowing next gen games like Wing Commander, Space Quest 4, Doom, Falcon 3.0 etc. Mind you, there were still some starts on Amiga like "Out of This World", unfortunately it was about as good on PC too. :)
Very nicely done. I love the way the Turrican character shoots and the computers appear at the beginning, nice touch. I take it these are early 486 DOS games. You can see that at the time the Amiga was better graphically and the sound and music was much better and with the Amiga you didn't have to worry about soundcards. Sadly since the Miggy's demise the PC has flourished, I wonder where the Miggy would be today if the big C didn't go under. I am waiting for the X1000 to come out. Great vid.
dude, you rock. Like part 1, it warms my old amiga heart to see this stuff... hehe, turrican should of pissed on that crappy PC, in the intro. yea anyway.
this shows that the golden age for the amiga ended arround 1993. the pc versions really got up to it with vga graphics and 256 colors. sad but true. the aga chipset didn't do anything about that.
Good luck with that. I've played around a lot with the old 386 computers and 486 computers and not only are most games worse, the whole thing about playing games from DOS are horrible.
Robocod is the opposite. The first was Amgia version.
And for all you nitpickers out there - I *know* the Amiga is a PC! :D
I'm using the term as it is most often used these days."
No, they are wrong. Those systems were called Home Computers and were designed to have everything built in ahead of their time. Meaning? Only upgrades an amiga needed was RAM, and if you wanted a hard disk drive . In fact even without the upgrades it OWNED pcs. Period.
@fuckinfak Sure is. The IBM PC's sound is like my old Atari 2600/ VCS console from 1977! Even a Commodore=64 had better music ability than those IBM PCs
.
I remember people trying to convince me to buy an IBM, and I just laughed. That would have been a downgrade from my C=64. Instead I bought the Amiga. I never touched a PC until 1998 (and then we depressed by its slowness and dullness).
If I remember the best home computer to have was something like this:
Amiga > Atari ST > Mac > C64 > Atari XE/XL > Apple IIe > IBM PC > Tandy > Franklin > TI.
This was pretty much the way it was until Win95 and the 486DX2 (or arguably for stability and prevalence of multimedia: A 586 + Win98SE) meant a PC was worth having. Also some diehards would argue on the Atari vs. Commodore aspect (I had an XE and an Amiga) but regardless of which, they spanked the Apples and PCs of the 8-bit era.
@harleykman is not like u say my Olivetti386 33mh was much better than amiga i had vga1 mb hard disk 80 mb and sound card from roland and was much better than amiga. i remanber i have a game called alone in the dark from infrogames that still with pc speaker doing fx sound effect and incredible 3D graphic for the time, no miga e no mac was able to do that and worked with dos no windows windows was just for office application. go to look after alone in the dark 1992
@LOveERDos Yeah I'm not buying it. I lived during that time period (circa 1990) and the PCs didn't hold a candle to what a 1985 Amiga could do, unless you're were willing to spend over $5000 to get the latest expensive video and sound cards (which I was not)
.
Plus in 1990 games were programmed to what most PC owners actually owned. i.e. CGA and a bare-boned SoundBlaster, and did not take advantage of expensive setups
@harleykman yes the thing is change in 1990 , first the amiga was better, all the game for pc was just in ega and cga but with vga is change. the thing stupid is that the amiganian say that pc was to expansive and now they spend 1000 time more than a normal pc for to keep amigas alive look the board EFIKA how much cost
anyway i love the people that keep the fire burning
How much of playable games they created on just couple of diskettes. Amiga got 720KB space on single diskette (MF2 - DD (DD-double density)) PC got then HD (high density) 1,44MB
how about comparing monkey island 1 pc and amiga version, dune 2 isn't that bad either. additionally you're using to slow DOSBOX values (around 4. something ghz) ... sure it's all an accident *lol* ...
I was a huge Amiga fan. The first time I saw something on the PC that was better than the Amiga was when Id soft released Wolfenstein 3D. If they only had released it on the Amiga in stead.
Kinda true however and no im not a ravid fan boy I feal that the system never got the support like a PC did. Bill Gates dident get uber rich on accadent@kokopiko
AMIGA is KICK ASS and will always be
vabis1200 4 weeks ago
Back then it sounds and looks like the Amiga kicked the PC's butt and thereason why is the PC couldn't do as much back then and they were over 1,000 dollars while the Commodore was 500$ or below.
The commodore 64 could actually do those graphics of the Amiga if done with the right programmers. However. most C64 games were done by people in their own garage to make a few bucks..
Luciferminusone 1 month ago
My heart goes with the Amiga no matter what. Even though I've used them for everyday use between the late 90's until I got this iMac the PC has never been my favorite system at any point in time, especially not for gaming. It's like the PC could be summed up by 3 genres whilst the Amiga did a bit of everything and beyond.
madcapoperator 1 month ago
What is silly about this video is that most PC gamers weren't playing Amiga style platform games. None of these PC games were hits, because us PC gamers were playing games like Darklands, (a cRPG), or Flight Sims like Gunship 2000, strategy games like Dune and especially adventure games like the Infocom titles!
HardWarUK 2 months ago
To be fair, the pc version is not using soundblaster at a guess?
phoxytwicks 2 months ago
Dragon's Lair:
PC/DOS Version: /watch?v=7_KFMSbnz3w
Amiga Version: /watch?v=dSE5LFdOtQI
Space Ace.
Amiga Version: /watch?v=pX11cprmfdU
PC/DOS Version: /watch?v=gbns9_5ykMg
vapourmile 3 months ago
how come the sound of almost EVERY PC game is much, much worse than of Amiga games???
nemesis447 4 months ago
@nemesis447 the amiga sound chip was really ahead of time, it took over 10 years for the pc to match it
youuuuuuuuuuutube 3 months ago
wrath of the demons music is nearly identical to shadow of the beast..also the 'punching' of the flyers of this game looks so shadow of the beast...EPIC times!
asdrubael1985 4 months ago
You missed the main difference: until the nineties, hardly anybody used a PC for gaming, since PC's were mainly expensive office machines.
tsuihark 4 months ago
I don't really see what this video is trying to show since both variations of each game are almost identical, this doesn't look like a consummate victory on either side. I wouldn't say the same side wins on every occasion. Makes it look about 50/50 to me.
vapourmile 5 months ago
@vapourmile Open your ears.
zakkattakk89 4 months ago
@zakkattakk89 Ok, well for one thing, the person who made this 'demo' must have gone to some trouble to find a PC with the lowest spec soundcard on the market. Secondly, I don't think much of the Amiga music and sound effects either, and trying to hurl insults, like most Amiga users, is not persuasive it just makes you look like a jerk. meanwhile, if a PC user made the same demo, it would spin things the other way:
PC: /watch?v=7_KFMSbnz3w
Amiga: /watch?v=pX11cprmfdU
vapourmile 3 months ago 2
@vapourmile umad?
zakkattakk89 3 months ago
Comment removed
vapourmile 3 months ago
@zakkattakk89 Nope. You and your Amiga friends are wrong about the differences between PCs and Amigas. Once Compaq released the 32-bit 386, in 1986, there was no longer any competition from the Amiga. The comparisons are usually made by Amiga owners, who tend to compare the worst of the PC versus the best of the Amiga. The "PC" it demonstrates doesn't exist except as a selection of cheap hardware and bad games. Real PCs looked more like this... "/watch?v=mYuR8hsoCCk&feature=related" go to 3:24
vapourmile 3 months ago
@vapourmile i agree completely as someone who owns both systems (amiga 500+), the comparison especially very early pc games are shown not using the top graphics mode and show cga graphics and pc speaker instead of using a proper sound card which were avilable in the mid 80's and ega graphics.
but it dosent stop with comparisions with the pc but includes biased not comparing like models with like with the archemidies and atari st's
im the proud owner of a archemidies 3010 and a ste
cant1rac 1 month ago
@vapourmile nice to do comparisions, but the comparisions have to be fair.
dont compare a 64k amstrad version of hard drivin, with a 128k version on the spectrum, the 64k version loses sound and drops frame rate, the 128k version adds sound and the frame rate increase, makes a big difference to the comparison.
main critisim is too many comparisons are using pc speaker rather than using a sound card, and remember the pc was a buisness machine not a consumer level machine in the 80's
cant1rac 1 month ago
I love comparison videos, great job
Thanks!.
saturndual32 5 months ago
Terminator 2 The movie was made in Newtek Lightwave and Opalvision and SC. Remember... The videogame Terminator 2 includes a fee frames from the movie and surprise!!! in two 3.5 diskettes. Amiga Forever.
TDTerix 5 months ago
No surprise at all, PC was designed as an office computer, Amiga rather as a gaming machine. Pity you haven't compared Robocop or Barbarian 1 (on PC entitled Deathsword). From the other side if you compare Amiga OS4 to Windows 7, there's no talk at all.
Abrimaal 5 months ago
I remember every single game , but cant recall me ever buying them
Nadimbaig 5 months ago
Wow, wrath of the demon is such a shadow of the beast rip-off
marathi22 6 months ago
the 486 was when the power difference became noticeable between the two. loved them both
davebishopcomedy 6 months ago
@davebishopcomedy
Amiga with 68060 was faster than Pentium.
Turrican4D 5 months ago
Interesting...thanks.
PAULLONDEN 6 months ago
a blast from the past
markcumbriauk 7 months ago
Amiga had better
rewolwerow 7 months ago
the future sucks!
thezodiak666 7 months ago
PC doesn't stand a chance. Period. :)
TheCrazyStudent 7 months ago
Until 1992-1993, Amiga had better GPU / SPU hardware...
Later with first 386 released, PC started to take the lead
Zenon66 8 months ago
@Zenon66
I would say the 386, while much closer to the Amiga than PCs had been before, still wasn't fully up there with Amigas.
Well, 386 machines were better for certain kinds of games, while Amigas were still better at other games... such as really fast paced, multilayered scrolling action games.
laffer35 8 months ago 5
@laffer35 Totally agree. I remember playing Gunship 2000 on my Amiga and seeing it on a mates 286 16mhz and laughing my head off at how crappy and slow it was.. and the Amiga couldn't even do 3d that well!
ObsoleteAcey 5 months ago
@laffer35 Is it possible to make a PC MS-DOS title with SNES quality graphics and multilayered backgrounds with some neat lighting effects (As seen in the SNES version of Earthworm Jim) and have it runnable on a 286 with VGA? (Maybe even a game that uses 320x240 or 360x240) and maybe a 6 channel half OPL2, half MOD Sample soundtrack?
If so, then which programming language should it be written in for best speed and least MEMORY usage?
Maybe even use a 16-bit DOS Extender?
Dakkiller1 4 months ago
@Zenon66
I think you have the timeline a bit messed up. Intel released 386 processor in 1985, and it was mainstream in homes in late 80s. I got my first gaming PC in 1991 which had a 486DX-33Mhz, and by then 486 processors were quite meanstream already. 386 were low-end.
Even then, Amiga could still achieve better 2D scrolling games, but PC was much more powerful for 3D and pseudo-3D games like Wing Commander 1-2, Ultima Underworld 1-2, Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, flight combat simulators etc.
timppa000 4 months ago in playlist Käyttäjän timppa000 suosikit 3
@Zenon66 The difference came with late 486s and Pentiums.
DrxSlump 4 months ago
@Zenon66 Nah, 286's were when the PC's pulled ahead with better speed, graphics and sound. Wolfenstein 3D ran 70 frames per second on a 12 MHz 286. All the Sierra and LucasArts games looked infinitely better on 286 VGA, compared to the grainy Amiga versions.
pcretrogamer 3 months ago 2
Loved my Amigas (500 & 2000), no doubt about that. If you compared Ghosts´n Goblins on Amiga vs PC you could see an even more dramatic difference. BUT as soon as VGA and Soundblaster became available for the PC, Amiga´s demise became inevitable. Even if there have been thousands(!) of games available for the Amiga, very few(!) really rocked (come on, be honest to yourself...). The tons of Amiga-demos available back then - blowing you away back in 87 - also became more and more boring in the end.
blablupp77 8 months ago 13
@blablupp77 Yup, 100% true.
vapourmile 3 months ago
you can do cool stuff with AMIGA AMIGA runs 2D games more smother (better audio quality)
AMIGA is the best but now in 2011 its just old junk
TheLastIkalo 8 months ago
what a badass sound in Harley Davidson PC version =D but surely nothing like a motorbike sound
x1s0 9 months ago
Oh if we are at this PC vs Amiga war...
Please try to watch this video on your Amiga, while I watch this YouTube vid perfectly fine on my PC :P
bernatk 9 months ago
@bernatk I watch it fine on my modern Amiga. I'm doubting you can watch a YouTube vid on a 286/386. What is your point?
mickjt84 8 months ago
@mickjt84 Unless you're watching this on an Amiga no faster than a 68030 @ 50MHz it's just a bit unfair to say that
Wutdahellisdis 7 months ago
@Wutdahellisdis He's talking about PC vs Amiga. Any modern PC and any modern Amiga can watch the video just fine. Any old Amiga won't be able to, just as any old PC won't be able to either, from the same age. You can't compare a 68030/50 to a modern PC. You have to compare it with a PC from 1993 or so. So his point isn't valid (his point being PC can watch it and Amiga can't).
mickjt84 7 months ago
@mickjt84 Fair enough, from the comment it sounded to me like you were comparing a modern Amiga with an old PC yourself. No worries
Wutdahellisdis 6 months ago
@bernatk >>>"Please try to watch this video on your Amiga, while I watch this YouTube vid perfectly fine on my PC"
.
My 68060 Commodore Amiga plays the video just fine.
Why do you ask?
(oh yeah- because you're a dipshit who doesn't realize how powerful the Amiga coprocessors truly were)
.
electrictroy2010 5 months ago 2
C64 & Amiga forever!
srRicardoHacker 9 months ago
Amiga <3
r3wcifer 9 months ago
I grew up with a PC but i would love to get my hands on an Amiga one day. I played it too but different games i had on PC.
btw recently i was trying out some emulators to see different versions of the same game and Lost Vikings is best on the SNES it has background in every level, while on PC an Amiga was only black.
I think they were just being lazy and did not program them in.
droiderer 10 months ago
AMIGA > PC ... forever! Omg how much hours I used to spend in this game....never completed it was too young... ill play it again when I`ll get the chance....AMIGA FTW!
Megadrivemalta 10 months ago
frame rate, pixelpitch/AA and the overall colour scheme used the Amiga rocked!! compared to the pc..... sound/music the Amiga was and IS ! UNBEATABLE!!
Megadrivemalta 10 months ago
Amiga for the win!
BrianPicchi 10 months ago
are they ever going to release a newer updated version of AMIGA at all?
also i heard a rumour years ago that leisure sit larry 4 was made only for amiga is this true?
jawbraeka 10 months ago
The wrath of the demon game looks like the riding phase in Hillsfar
Ruslakall 10 months ago
@KiranaForever Actually for adventure games it wouldn't be so bad. They were almost all hard disk installable.
The real killer actually was action games. 3 disks werent uncommon and they rarely supported HD install (as they usually bypassed the OS anyways)
weaselfierce 10 months ago
amiga..nuff said.
sinister066 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KiranaForever You could have shown some point'n'click adventure games. The PC with its hard disk and perhaps a Roland MT-32, versus an Amiga with a hard disk too.
jyminer 10 months ago
It's still irritating to think that with some of the best consumer hardware and software on the market, along with a rock solid user base, Commodore still managed to screw up.
My A500 was a beloved possession however I made the mistake of also buying a CD32 when they came out. They were capable machines, but too underpowered for the war that was raging amongst formats by then. On hindsight I should have jumped ship to PC at that point, but I still believed Amiga would be the future. *sigh*
CountScarlioni 10 months ago
Yes, the Amiga was indeed way ahead of its time when it came out. Compare a 1989 Amiga game with the same title on the PC and the difference is obvious.
However, by 1992 the Amiga had become largely obsolete. The popularization of the SVGA, CD-ROMs and the SoundBlater pretty much ended the Amiga dominance in terms of multi-media and graphics . RIP AMIGA.
camberiu 10 months ago
From what game is intro sound of this video?
wlcina 10 months ago
@wlcina Super Cars 2 - Amiga
jyminer 10 months ago
I have no bias towards any one particular computing platform, bus as far as this video goes the Amiga was clearly the better machine on a like-for-like basis. Nicely done by the way!
Cthulhu1970 11 months ago
No'bad, now let's take a look at Bulletstorm.
ContainmentFailure 11 months ago
for those fuckers this is the evidence that AMIGA RULED!!
gabrielirlanda 11 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Why don't you show us some Wolfenstein3D - 1992 or Doom 1993 on the Amiga? this is pointless.
HipHop1981 11 months ago
@HipHop1981
Remember the Amiga was released in 1985.
laffer35 11 months ago 12
@laffer35 amiga is better:)
razorbulan 11 months ago
@laffer35 Amiga was way better of the PC in 2D gaming, and from 1987 (the year when the A500 came out and the majority of the gamers could afford the system) to 1991 it was the system of choice for computer videogaming. But when the intel 486 became affordable the software renderers on the IBM PC could do almost the same things that did the Amiga hardware, and with more amount of RAM games like Ultima Underworld, Wolfenstein, Doom, etc., became feasible on PC but not on Amiga (at the time).
DarioNeodi 9 months ago
@laffer35 Said that, I'm not arguing that the IBM PC was superior with his software rendering approach at gaming. Rather, from 1994 also on the PC became prevalent the hardware rendering (thanks to 3dfx Glide, later by Direct 3D and OpenGL on Windows) that made the C=64 and Amiga machines at the top of their era. Transform & Lightning in fact brought to the extremes the concept of video chip like Denise on the Amiga OCS machines.
DarioNeodi 9 months ago
@laffer35 So, in fact, the main reason under the Amiga loss in market was the bad management at Commodore. In 1990 came out the ECS that wasn't really an upgrade to OCS, and AGA came too late, two years the bankruptcy for Commodore. When the AAA chipset, the real "next generation" for Amiga, came near completion it was simple too obsolete to compete with PC in 1993/1994, so it was abandoned. If Amiga had AGA in 1989 and a 3D capable AAA in 1993 perhaps today would still be a mainstream computer.
DarioNeodi 9 months ago
@laffer35
So what? You also compare games from 1993-1994 so why not Doom or Wolfenstein 3D?
Because Amiga would look crap.
MegaMasa2000 6 months ago
@MegaMasa2000
Neither Wolfenstein nor Doom were released for the Amiga, I don't count fan ports from years later.
laffer35 6 months ago
@HipHop1981 type "doom amiga" on the youtube search and look for yourself.
weaselfierce 11 months ago
@HipHop1981 This is clearly a comparison of the games available on both platforms. Doom/Wolfenstein were not released for both platforms...... duh.... The amiga was way ahead of its time
wulfsburg65 11 months ago
@HipHop1981 A few seconds search on youtube will show you Doom running on an amiga. Put some effort in.
weaselfierce 10 months ago
@HipHop1981 Here you go !
/watch?v=Q_rFTtQ9Kuk Behind the iron gate
its called not for nothing 10 years ahead of its time ;)
janmansde3dede 8 months ago
@HipHop1981 Look at Gloom on the Amiga a pretty good doom clone on the amiga also look at alien breed 3d
MegaJacob97 8 months ago
@HipHop1981 The different nature of the chip-sets and the way pixels are organised, really. The 286 was slightly faster than a 68000 running at the same clock frequency, which gave it a boost on polygon games. 386 pcs came out 2 years later for home PCS, just a year or so after the first Amiga and was just under 3 times faster, clock for clock, though they were expensive.
Wutdahellisdis 7 months ago
@HipHop1981 PCs could do 'chunky' graphics (bits defining each pixel were packed together, instead of planes (planar) which were more suited for games like Wolfenstein.The Amiga strength were its chipsets. The 'Denise' graphics chip and the 'Agnus' with its 'Blitter' and 'Copper' subcomponents were fantastic at handling 2D.
Wutdahellisdis 7 months ago
@HipHop1981 Doom and Wolfenstein were never released on the amiga, the only versions availbale are fan made ones.
S0ryiu 7 months ago
@HipHop1981 Because running Wolf 3D or Doom in 1992 would have required spending $5000 for your PC. Not many people could afford that, and chose the $500 Amiga instead
..
Also worth noting it was not PC that was used to make Star Trek, Babylon 5, or seaQuest. special effects It was the Amiga (with video toaster) because of its superior graphics
.
electrictroy2010 5 months ago
The Amiga had better sound & graphics, It had it all the games and the applications.
cybermaxpower 11 months ago
awesome
Kimsjovoll 1 year ago
@CrimOfAzureSky then your lucky.......I have 3 amigas with no floppy :'(
leontas2007 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Amiga was so better than pc and now Pc is better than consoles
1981mdm 1 year ago
Amiga was so better than pc and now Pc is better than consoles
1981mdm 1 year ago
@1981mdm
Nowdays, pc's and consoles are built from the same junk anyway....
utubeacc1209 11 months ago
@utubeacc1209
Yeah, things have become quite a bit more boring, eh.
laffer35 11 months ago
LOL the amiga version of street rod was so superior they even added fluffy dice hanging off the mirror to show off!
NeoHoshi 1 year ago
man....amiga sound is like sex to me. Yeah I am nerd but f*** it. The music in most of the game on there is so amazing that I am almost drooling.I need to find some of these soundtracks. For only 4 channels this beast had the best sound ever heard coming from a PC. Amiga was/is the gaming GOD of PC gaming hands down.
TheDemoniusX 1 year ago
amiga superior ampliamente psc apesta
NESTORGAMARRA1 1 year ago
Nice video. Although the IIGS kind of blows both of these out of the water.
BrianPicchi 1 year ago
This vid is great, but Amiga cant make Rocket ranger fly : (
I laughed so hard because I expected him to fly.
R.I.P Rocket man Amiga Version.
crazyqaz 1 year ago
This vid is great, but Amiga cant make Rocket ranger fly : (
I laughed so hard because I expected him to fly.
R.I.P Rocket man Amiga Version.
crazyqaz 1 year ago
Wonderful choice of games that were compared. Think that the traditional PC got an undeserved treatment though since basic PC did not include a soundcard. It would have been even more interesting if this wonderful comparison would have compared the traditional PC vs. the Amiga as StraightOutofTheBox. Needless to say the trad. PC would have sounded horrible to say the least.
Is anybody in position to compare trad. PC vs. Amiga?:
• BOB
• SWOTL
• Pirates
• Hero’s Quest
solverh 1 year ago
By the early 90's the PC with 256 color vga graphic cards had caught up quite a bit with the Amiga although the sounds were still not so good even with a sound card (musical sounds for sound effects). In the 80's though the PC with it's 16 color EGA and buzzer sound was no match for the Amiga.
Dethmeister 1 year ago
@Dethmeister the soundblaster originally came out in the 80s for 8 bit ISA, if you buy the original soundblaster it will install in a model 5150 ibm pc. :) although you want Soundblaster 2.0 which also was for 8 bit isa, it had better sound.
neutrino78x 1 year ago
yeah, see, if you have a game that takes advantage of EGA or VGA, you get much better graphics. of course a game using CGA is not going to look as good as amiga. :)
neutrino78x 1 year ago
1:10 did he fart? "PPIIuuurggh""" *jump* amiga forever.
ZZombyWooff 1 year ago
PC SUCKS....
LOVE AMIGA :)
i am a pc player but AMIGA WAS MY FAVORITE MACHINE!!!!!
Come back AMIGA ;)
DimitrisAlexopoulos 1 year ago 14
correction i personally moved to pc about 96, and duke nukem had came out
the amiga had died without any hope of reserection in 94. and the atari was to die in 98
but we knew it wasnt capable to compete in 92, when id released wolfenstein 3d, and the 3-4 years no real competator game came out the st or amiga ranks, i was later cause i was an st user so with atari being sold in 98 after a failed merger to keep it afloat in 96, so when i moved atari was still there.
cant1rac 1 year ago
@cant1rac Well considering the A1200 came out in 1992, it "could" compete with Wolvenstein 3D due to the likes of AB3D and Genetic Species that came later, although with Genetic Species it did require an 030 to run well but then most PC users had to upgrades to run newer 3D games as well. If Commodore had of stuck around and released the AAA chipset with a faster CPU during those years then yes it could have competed but as you said, they died out in 94 and that was the end.
blade004 1 year ago
@cant1rac Where MANY Amiga stuffed up COMPLETELY was literally refusing to upgrade their Amiga's with faster CPU's more memory..etc.. whilst with PC users they were more than happy to fork out for upgrades to run newer 3D titles. Many companies were trying to push the boundaries of 3D texture mapped games on the Amiga but hen by that time Commodore was bankrupt and people couldn't find any incentive to upgrade a Computer that was going to slowly die out.
blade004 1 year ago
@cant1rac I think another problem might have been that Amiga users during the early years hadn't a need to updgrade because the Amiga was so damn powerful and with polygon 3D many games even with a faster CPU didn't see an increase in frame rate due to the blitter.
Ah, its all so damn complex :(
blade004 1 year ago
why the amigas got to better than eveything any way richardmaudsley77?
it was a great machine for games, and i like my A-500+ for gaming pre 90
post 90 till amiga's collapse in 94 id use a pc
if i was to use a 16 bit computer for music i'd use an atari st!
but personaly i dont see that huge a difference between an st game and an amiga game to worry
desktop publishing id use an apple or an archmaedies
it was great at what it did, 2d scrollers
one of the best machines out for it, but thats it
cant1rac 1 year ago
problem with the pc if you werent using a soundblaster at the time the sound was shit, use a sound blaster the sound was great
cant1rac 1 year ago
may i point out the pc was putting out titles like wolfenstein 3d in 92, doom 93
and that the standard amigas of the time couldnt put similar titles out
people like me moved at the time from st and amiga's to pc round about 96-98 simply because they were both not in the same ball park for 3d graphics
and we got pissed off waiting for similar quality on our machines
you want to show the best the amiga could offer against the worst in the pc collection at the time, a fast a-600 doom port ? where?
cant1rac 1 year ago
@cant1rac No, standard Amiga's couldn't put out something like Doom but then either could a standard bare bones PC, but then with the PC there wasn't any "standard". In 1992 with an 030 CPU the Amiga "could" run Doom smoothly (I ran it on my Amiga 1200 with an 030 CPU), it just required people to do upgrades to their Amiga's like PC users did so it could gain some of those titles.
blade004 1 year ago
@blade004 most of what you said i agree with,.
upgraded a 1200 was and is a very capable computer.
ive seen amiga 1200 run quake 2 very effectively with the appropriate upgrades. think its a real shame computers like atari st's and amigas died out.
imagine how good say a ps3 would be with a built in keyboard full computer system and desktop applications photoeditors office software etc and the gaming ablity.
with the disgraceful drm on pc's currently, id certainly buy such a solution over a pc
cant1rac 1 year ago
@cant1rac The Atari st and Amiga, died only because of Atari and Commadores stagering level of incompetance.
better sound and graphics.
claims between Amigians, Pc, Mac and Atari is essentially rubbish.
it depended WHAT ablities you needed.
being a recording musician with live instruments and a photographer thoughs ablites were best served by the STe. then by PC when the Atari died.
gaming ablities ?
no doubt Amiga had the edge over the ST
best tool for the job.
which i why i owned/own all 3
cant1rac 1 year ago
i say its great for what most people used it for, and thats what i use mine for!
as a games machine?
doing serious music, desktop publishing, photography, the st and apple's were far superiour machines.
well until the amiga 1200 and then that amiga is really worthy for the over the top religious worshiping, cause that amiga and no other was really some machine for its time.. hey and i want one cause its a fantastic piece of kit.
but the a-500+ na, but great for games though
cant1rac 1 year ago
yeah i got a work bench, but its needs loaded in, why are amigians religious about it.
yeah it was the slightly better than an st for games
serious audio work forget it, cubase midi ports, im a musician (no contest) graphics, i did photography to degree level, sorry st was better
its main competion in thoughs areas, wasnt amiga, it was apple
you call that massive external power pack, the heath robbinson mess of a modulator and pass through cables, no re-set switch, on the a-500, a pro machine ?
cant1rac 1 year ago
Amiga looks better and the sound on some of them old dos games is bad
homer4556 1 year ago
graphics PC sound Amiga thats the verdict :3
y2k4ever1 1 year ago
Amiga was always better with sounds and music.
MinisterZdrowia 1 year ago
Amiga is the best! Btw you can do a wheelie in Harley Davidson :D
amigapoika 1 year ago
The AMIGA was a far better machine and still is today in many respects, deffinately easier to set up for your own requirements via the amazing amount of awesome software most of which is free or shareware, shame there'll never be a new one.
28steryan 1 year ago
i think street rod PC version looks better :)
TheDingDongDo 1 year ago
PC sound was utterly terrible
netscapepizza 1 year ago
Part 3 please. I like to watch these
Lemmy556 1 year ago
sorry watched through it again, there are a few games 93, 92 but unfair comparisons
pc 92 wolfenstein 93 doom
we could sellect between any system and find dud conversions
i can find games far better done on the atari st than the amiga, and the other way around. what does it prove ?
if we take doom pc version, jagaur scaled it down as did the 3do, the saturn, even the psx version wasnt as good
and guess what it never came out on st or amiga cause they were not capable as the few doom clones prove
cant1rac 1 year ago
atari st were better until the launch of the a-1200, my stfm the equivelent to make a comparison was infinetly better than my a-500+
the falcon i belive is supposed to be just behind the amiga 1200.
amiga is better than anything else claims are ludicrious.
its always swings and round abouts and what you need it for
today is the wii better than the ps3
no they all have + and - points.
read lots of amigian stuff on the 1200, cause i want to get one, but the religion of amigadom turns me cold
cant1rac 1 year ago
the reason the pc was not as good as a amiga back then was it was never considered to be a gaming system.
so even the c64 titles of games like stunt car racer, pc versions were awful.
i hate how amiga fans try and trouse everything, i own one it had a joke of a box and pass through cable no work bench pre loaded
amiga fixed it wih the 1200. try comparing say games from 92-95 the life of the 1200 not the 1980's cause really you could show better games on a atari 2600, its a crap argument
cant1rac 1 year ago
Great video by the way but there was once a Amiga vs Atari st video on Utube
what ever happened to that :( ?
janmansde3dede 1 year ago
OMG TEST DRIVE 2 WOW
:O
Like game boy and ps2 difrence in sound.
DOS version is so ear bleeding.
BranislavDJ 1 year ago
Nice documentation where the PC continually improved its graphic and sound capabilities where the Amiga didn't get any significant hardware improvements because of some sleeping Commodore managers...
dreael 1 year ago
i like references in newest star craft game to the lost vikings
buokopter 1 year ago
love this video u made, so retro, i was very very jealous at the AMIGA in the mid 80's cuz i used the MSX and MSX 2 machines and bought the PC XT-86 with EGA 16 colors, and every time i go to get a copy of a game in the game shop and watch some demos of the AMIGA games,,, boils my blood, BUT i had to say AMIGA was the BEST machine there is at that time. THX
rickonami 1 year ago
super, merci ^^
stouf04 1 year ago
On a technical side, the problem for Amiga was that while some advanced Amiga versions emerged, games were still designed for plain vanilla A500. A1200/AGA support was outdated already when it arrived.
On PC, games constantly used better hardware, better graphics, better controllers (analog flight sticks), better music hardware (even the pricey Roland LAPC-1/MT-32). So also on technical side, PC was running away from Amiga ever since Wing Commander (1990). 2D platform games aside.
timppa000 1 year ago
The main problem with Amiga was that unlike PC games, Amiga games didn't evolve (Zool, Magic Pockets, Gods... WTH???). If you wanted to play 2D platform jumping or shooter games, SNES and Sega Genesis were better platforms for kiddie games.
PC, on the other hand, got some really mindblowing next gen games like Wing Commander, Space Quest 4, Doom, Falcon 3.0 etc. Mind you, there were still some starts on Amiga like "Out of This World", unfortunately it was about as good on PC too. :)
timppa000 1 year ago
Excelent. Thank you.
ChrisRamses1973 1 year ago
Very nicely done. I love the way the Turrican character shoots and the computers appear at the beginning, nice touch. I take it these are early 486 DOS games. You can see that at the time the Amiga was better graphically and the sound and music was much better and with the Amiga you didn't have to worry about soundcards. Sadly since the Miggy's demise the PC has flourished, I wonder where the Miggy would be today if the big C didn't go under. I am waiting for the X1000 to come out. Great vid.
DLiberator78 1 year ago
amiga looks great vs PC until you get to commanche maximum overkill, DOOM etc
damn idiots at commodore didn't give the machine chunky-pixel format hence it became obselete
walter0bz 1 year ago
dude, you rock. Like part 1, it warms my old amiga heart to see this stuff... hehe, turrican should of pissed on that crappy PC, in the intro. yea anyway.
ZZombyWooff 1 year ago
Lost patrol mod and the end does it for me every time. Epic stuff. Thank you.
NuMoominba 1 year ago
this shows that the golden age for the amiga ended arround 1993. the pc versions really got up to it with vga graphics and 256 colors. sad but true. the aga chipset didn't do anything about that.
rocker11281 1 year ago
For goodness' sakes, I could just as easily put together a video that showcased a 386-16 smashing the Amiga. This was a just a LITTLE biased :-)
MobyGamer 1 year ago
@MobyGamer
The truth is Amiga was for a time better than most PCs.
Than the PC changed gears and left Amiga way behind.
It's funny when some Amiga Fanboi talks about ho mutch better the Amiga Sound is.
Then i often fire up my MT-32 :-)
Often they accuse me of cheating with CD sound.
The other hand i have to get a Midi Connector for my Amiga. There are almost none MT-32 games aviable. But it would be nice.
RFTL 1 year ago
@MobyGamer
Good luck with that. I've played around a lot with the old 386 computers and 486 computers and not only are most games worse, the whole thing about playing games from DOS are horrible.
hotrodswe 1 year ago
AGA wins! SVGA defeated
nicolunacba 1 year ago
Amiga! Ahhh the good times!
lindflake 1 year ago
@lindflake When computing was fun ;D
nicolunacba 1 year ago
Robocod is the opposite. The first was Amgia version.
And for all you nitpickers out there - I *know* the Amiga is a PC! :D
I'm using the term as it is most often used these days."
No, they are wrong. Those systems were called Home Computers and were designed to have everything built in ahead of their time. Meaning? Only upgrades an amiga needed was RAM, and if you wanted a hard disk drive . In fact even without the upgrades it OWNED pcs. Period.
ShadowDreadblade 1 year ago
PC Graphics looks ugly (cold) and sound is SO FUCKING ANNOYING!!!! worst than Zx Spectrum... Amiga kicks PC ass.
klops3000 1 year ago
the sound on the pc is horrible
fuckinfak 1 year ago
@fuckinfak Sure is. The IBM PC's sound is like my old Atari 2600/ VCS console from 1977! Even a Commodore=64 had better music ability than those IBM PCs
.
I remember people trying to convince me to buy an IBM, and I just laughed. That would have been a downgrade from my C=64. Instead I bought the Amiga. I never touched a PC until 1998 (and then we depressed by its slowness and dullness).
harleykman 1 year ago
If I remember the best home computer to have was something like this:
Amiga > Atari ST > Mac > C64 > Atari XE/XL > Apple IIe > IBM PC > Tandy > Franklin > TI.
This was pretty much the way it was until Win95 and the 486DX2 (or arguably for stability and prevalence of multimedia: A 586 + Win98SE) meant a PC was worth having. Also some diehards would argue on the Atari vs. Commodore aspect (I had an XE and an Amiga) but regardless of which, they spanked the Apples and PCs of the 8-bit era.
pauljs75 1 year ago
@harleykman is not like u say my Olivetti386 33mh was much better than amiga i had vga1 mb hard disk 80 mb and sound card from roland and was much better than amiga. i remanber i have a game called alone in the dark from infrogames that still with pc speaker doing fx sound effect and incredible 3D graphic for the time, no miga e no mac was able to do that and worked with dos no windows windows was just for office application. go to look after alone in the dark 1992
LOveERDos 1 year ago
@LOveERDos Yeah I'm not buying it. I lived during that time period (circa 1990) and the PCs didn't hold a candle to what a 1985 Amiga could do, unless you're were willing to spend over $5000 to get the latest expensive video and sound cards (which I was not)
.
Plus in 1990 games were programmed to what most PC owners actually owned. i.e. CGA and a bare-boned SoundBlaster, and did not take advantage of expensive setups
.
harleykman 1 year ago
@harleykman yes the thing is change in 1990 , first the amiga was better, all the game for pc was just in ega and cga but with vga is change. the thing stupid is that the amiganian say that pc was to expansive and now they spend 1000 time more than a normal pc for to keep amigas alive look the board EFIKA how much cost
anyway i love the people that keep the fire burning
LOveERDos 1 year ago
@LOveERDos I haven't spent a dime on my Amiga 500 since I bought it. Plus I got a free Amiga 2000 from a friend who didn't want it anymore
.
And a NEW Power Amiga costs about $900 - cheaper than a Macintosh
.
harleykman 1 year ago
@LOveERDos
Amiga couldn't do 3D huh ?
I guess Alien breed 3D, Doom, Breathless, Gloom and Quake were mirages of imagination then.
weaselfierce 1 year ago
@weaselfierce yes but u must pomp your amiga with expansive board! an normal amiga 1200 can't play that game
LOveERDos 1 year ago
@LOveERDos Doom doesn't run on a 286 either. My first crappy PC cost 4 times as much as my 1200 had, so why not compare apples to apples.
Both Fears and Alien Breed3D ran very playable on a basic A1200. Whats the best FPS that will run on a PC with 2 megs of RAM?
weaselfierce 1 year ago
articlesbase#com/computers-articles/commodore-amiga-returns-a-new-super-amiga-on-its-way-1685091#html
#: use . key...
Fear not heres a link about the new Amiga slated for release Summer of 2010!!!!
ACDCISCOOLNESS 1 year ago
amiga rocked hard on the '80 but after 1990 PC were way more powerful, and then DooM marked the Amiga vs PC war end.
pwEclipse 1 year ago
amiga wins
germangravity 1 year ago
How much of playable games they created on just couple of diskettes. Amiga got 720KB space on single diskette (MF2 - DD (DD-double density)) PC got then HD (high density) 1,44MB
AMIGA 500 for ever in my heart ;)
5/5 +Fav
ton1q 1 year ago
heh I fogot that I had Argghhh on my A500... that was a great game. I remember it now...
colliric 1 year ago
LOl typical biased video
how about comparing monkey island 1 pc and amiga version, dune 2 isn't that bad either. additionally you're using to slow DOSBOX values (around 4. something ghz) ... sure it's all an accident *lol* ...
r8qt7 1 year ago
I was a huge Amiga fan. The first time I saw something on the PC that was better than the Amiga was when Id soft released Wolfenstein 3D. If they only had released it on the Amiga in stead.
autofire07 1 year ago
Comparing PC to Amiga is senseless. It`s like comparing some particular model of 80`s bicycle to cars in general.
Like comparing PS2 to PC as well. Ps2 was muche better on start and later on it was worse.
Check all those 80`s titles, was much better on Amiga but 3D era disqualified Amiga completly
kokopiko 1 year ago
Kinda true however and no im not a ravid fan boy I feal that the system never got the support like a PC did. Bill Gates dident get uber rich on accadent@kokopiko
zeos101 1 year ago
many had their good times back then, but ultimately the strongest of them all WON...PC :P
xStalkerxx 1 year ago
il migliore e' sempre stato l'amiga 500
vivaglianimali 2 years ago
but a amiga is a pc pc means personal computer not a bully boy bill box
2j4ez 2 years ago