Pic related. Why were games for PC so uninspired/choppy/graphically stunted as compared with console games of the era.
>>3169560
No hardware sprites/tiles meant everything had to be done in software, which meant shit framerates. Jazz Jackrabbit was the first PC platformer than ran at 60fps, everything before that is garbage.
>>3169560
The short answer is: PC's were intended as business and productivity machines. Things like scrolling and audio weren't really meant to be implemented.
As time went on, most PC users would still just be re-purposing older productivity hardware for games, so it took until the NOT RETRO era before PC's finally surpassed consoles graphically.
Because cheaper microcomputers were still a thing.
>>3169576
>it took until the NOT RETRO era before PC's finally surpassed consoles graphically.
This is Doom on the PC
>>3169576
>>3169639
This is Doom on console
>>3169574
>Jazz Jackrabbit was the first PC platformer than ran at 60fps, everything before that is garbage.
God damn I loved that game when I was a kid. To me at the time it was like Sonic with guns. I didn't realize it had that significance.To be fair I also did like the 2d duke nukems if only for the fact I liked any game I could get my hands on.
>uninspired
I'm really not seeing how you could reach that conclusion.
Consoles always seemed more creatively bankrupt.
This thread needs a Usenet-fag, who posts old messages on this topic.
Yeah, a crappy doom port to console really shows that PC games were up to par compared to consoles....
>>3169560
>uninspired
Utter nonsense. I could run a Latin American shithole in Hidden Agenda, a secret agency in Floor 13, collapse communism in Solidarity - or keep it alive in Crisis in the Kremlin. Or just fuck it all and climb all the way from a ronin to shogun in Sword of the Samurai, or play an unusual adventure game and RPG hybrid in Quest For Glory. All Duke 1's contemporaries or even older. There's more to videogames than platformers and the PC always had a fuckton of great RPGs, adventure and strategy games.
>>3169576
naw, VGA
>>3169560
Screenshot takes me back.
I thought PC gaming was pretty balls until around lemmings, prince of persia and wolf3d
Then Doom came out and PC felt it had deeper and more advanced games until around ps1.
After that it was all about whether you were willing to spend the $$ to outperform the console of the day.
I went back and finished every level of lemmings 1 a few years ago. So rewarding. Just saiyan.
>>3169865
Just realised the ps1 probably came out only a year after doom. Not in my poor world though.
Christmas 1997.
>>3169560
Because shareware games were what people would mislabel as "indie" these days.
Small, often amateurish products done by only a bunch of dudes in their sparetime.
On the other hand you had a large share professional stuff like Wing Commander, System Shock, Alone in the Dark, Lucas Arts games, etc.
>>3169639
Where did you get a widescreen CRT when doom came out?
>>3170120
>640x400
You can just display that with "letterboxed" black area in any regular 14" CRT monitor, dumbass. Fucking summerfags are like born yesterday.
>>3169560
Because DOS PCs up until the early-to-mid '90s were machines designed for creating graphs and spreadsheets, not blasting aliens or slaying dragons.
If you look at the Atari ST and especially the Commodore Amiga you will see that those can fare much better against the likes of Nintendo and Sega. But both of those were expensive compared to the rough IBM clones from Taiwan that your dad probably used.
>>3170126
I saw this exact dick pic in /pol/... Are you some kind of 4chan dick bandito?
>>3170132
The Apple II was less capable of a machine than PCs yet did not suffer from this problem.
>>3169560
Pic related. Why were games for consoles so uninspired/choppy/graphically stunted as compared with PC games of the era.
I don't know OP why don't you tell me
>>3170120
320X200 (instead of 320X240) was the natural resolution of DOS games.
It was meant to be stretched out on a CRT and artists accounted for that.
Ill informed DOSbox users neglect to turn on aspect correction in the config and get oval suns and moons.
>>3170375
320x200 proper isn't 4:3, so unless you correct for aspect ratio it will look more stretched than it does on a real CRT.
A whole bunch of reasons. One of them being that most programmers in the 80s were familiar with the 6502 and Z80, but not the 8086 so in many cases they didn't know how to write efficient, optimized code on it. Even if you were an x86 coding wizard, there was the problem that subsequent generations of Intel CPUs would have configuration changes that ruined your code optimization. Code that runs well on an 8086 may not run so well on a 386.
Another reason was that pre-VGA video cards were a horrible programming headache and even worse, by the late 80s you had to support 4-5 different video modes at once, completely unlike a C64 or Amiga where there was one system configuration. Other elements of the PC architecture such as segmented memory also made coding for them a frustrating experience.
Most game developers in the 80s were centered around the Apple II, Atari 800, C64, and Amiga (Sierra being a notable exception). They developed games primarily for those platforms and IBM compatibles were often an afterthought so they would get half-assed ports banged out in a few weeks.
>>3170414
Regarding code optimization, a good example would be AppleWorks. This was running on a 1Mhz CPU and it was almost demonically fast because the programmers were all veterans who knew the 6502 like the back of their hand.
Doesn't Amiga count as a PC?
Hard Hat Mack on the Apple II:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCGYMFItKZc
And the PC:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCntG7mvGMI
Note that the Apple version has almost seamless 60 fps animation on a 1Mhz CPU with no hardware sprites. The IBM version is noticeably choppier and has much more flicker.
>>3169646
>This is Doom on console
Oh wow you have one game that's better. Ill have to run and go cry into my pile of literally hundreds of Sega and Nintendo games
report and filter the post above
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feH_bz-PwRA
And here's HHM running on a real Apple II.
>>3170737
>166 blocks
This translates into 42,496 bytes.
>>3170774
It might be slightly rounded off because the file size is computed in sectors rather than bytes so even if a file occupies just one byte out of a sector, it's counted as using the entire thing.
>>3170787
All file systems work like that. Disk sectors cannot be shared by two files; if a file is just 4 bytes in size, it's still actually reserving one whole sector for itself.
You can see this on any modern PC by checking file properties. Note the size in bytes figure and the size on disk figure.
>>3170120
They didn't, monitors with non-square pixels were common at the time which stretched a 320x200 screen from 8:5 to 4:3 and made it appear taller than in these screenshots
Modern emulators/source ports can do software stretching to imitate this but it really looks like shit compared to how it was on an old monitor
>>3170120
You could get a widescreen LCD back then.
>>3169560
>>3170546
>what is whole RTS genre
>what are LucasArts adventures and the like
>what is Alone in the Dark
>what is Descent
>what is System Shock
>what is Magic Carpet
>what is DragonStrike
>what is Populous
>what is Daggerfall
wew lad,
And those are only ones I remember of fthe top of my head because I played them all to death back then. Also The Incredible Machine may not be that technically impressive, but that's the first thing remotely similar to physical puzzles I know, and I dont remember seeing anything like that on the consoles of that time.
>>3170907
A lot of those games can just be played on the Amiga instead. PCs weren't good at games until the 90s. If it's a pre-1991 game, you're almost always better off playing it on the C64, Atari 8-bit, or Amiga.
>>3170913
Amiga, C64, Atari 400/800/etc are PCs.
>>3170918
HEY, WHAT ABOUT THE X68000, THE PC 98 AND FM TOWNS.?
>>3170927
not PCs, just shitboxes
>>3169560
>Donk Fuckem
>bad
turbo casual detected.
>>3170927
x68000 is a personal workstation, the rest are personal computers.
>>3170941
>workstation
>computer
What's the difference?
>>3170946
>Workstations offered higher performance than mainstream personal computers, especially with respect to CPU and graphics, memory capacity, and multitasking capability
>>3170947
so, none? Same box? Just high end vs. mid end? Guess I have a gamer "workstation" then. Though, I mostly play with it? Does that make it a "playstation"?
The IBM PC wasn't optimized for graphics. It was very much a general purpose machine. Your big fast PC today would still be dead in the water when it comes to gaming were it not for the dedicated graphics hardware made by nVidia or ATI/AMD.
PC's lagged behind in terms of what they could do graphically until mid 90's when graphics cards and dedicated graphics chipsets started to become more common.
The reason you always see digital art and film people using Macs instead of PC's is because that's what they had to use 30 years ago. They still use them today because that's the prevailing industry standard, and long term standards like that really don't change without a big reason.
>>3170952
i can only speak for the modern definition of workstation but when we order workstation PCs where i work they're generally oriented towards people doing stuff like CAD or working with a shitton of data. at the higher end of workstation you can have two physical xeon cpus with like 12 cores per cpu, hundreds of gigs of ram, 8 hard drives, graphics cards with over 8 gig of vram
i don't have enough context for 1987 but i'm assuming that either the x68000 was aimed at the upper end of the market for businesses doing heavy work - or that the term "personal workstation" was used as a marketing strategy to make it stand out from other personal computers
>>3170414
Early compilers were not especially good either at producing optimized code and they would often do things like generate a shitton of MUL and DIV instructions. On a 286+, fine. No problem. 8086 users however had to suffer a huge performance penalty. Or clear registers with MOV AX,0 instead of XOR AX,AX.
Does anyone find it a bit ridiculous how 1983 is touted as the great crash while there was an entire scene for the PC going full-steam?
Another example of a lolsorandumb architectural change: On all x86 CPUs up to the Pentium 3, it takes fewer clock cycles to perform SUB AX,1 than DEC AX. On the Pentium 4, DEC instructions are faster than SUB. This meant that a large body of existing code was...yeah.
>>3172824
It's not ridiculous at all since the personal computer market and video game market both went down in flames, leading to the extinction of most non-IBM architectures and also the removal of personal computers from the casual market for a decade (during the mid-90s, normies began using computers again).
>>3172824
it was quite a crash for dedicated gaming hardware and full time gaming publishers/developers
>>3172831
The casualty list was long. Osborne, North Star, Cromemco, Atari, Morrow, Texas Instruments, Kaypro.
wtf is going here
did silicon valley just jump in
It's possibly down to the PD scene; a few good ideas but a glut of identikit platformers and shoot 'em ups that dominated for a long time, because of the growing trends and demand for those kinds of games.
I suppose it's not really surprising that when you supply a large group of people with the tools to make whatever they want, they'll copy what they like first. I think that ethic stuck for too long.
>>3172934
platformers and shooters? PC didn't get those until the early 90s, which also happens to be when PC gaming took off and almost lapped consoles, because CPUs were finally good enough to do some reasonable 3D, while consoles were stuck with 2D hardware.
>>3172950
Ah shit, that's what I thought you guys were talking about, sorry!
My first experience with PC games was through the public domain games that made wide circulation and they were always the same kind of games, often using the same sprites and game designs because they had to fit onto a floppy.
I should sleep, my apologies again.
Lousy controls were a factor as well.
>>3170907
Most of those games are boring PC junk.
>>3173017
"lousy controls" gave the PC genres like the point&click, or the RTS or the complex flight sim, stuff that hardly existed on consoles. "lousy controls" pioneered the FPS and were so dominant, cross platform multiplayer had to be avoided until PC shooters got the same sluggish movements. Management sims pioneered on the computers but eventually made their way to consoles, because timing of input was not as critical, so convoluted UIs could work
>>3169560
If you ever tried to program a late 80s-early 90s PC, you'd understand.
>>3173027
Referring of course to arcade games. You only had a keyboard or a mushy analog joystick back then.
>>3173050
What's wrong with the keyboard? Provided you didn't have rubber shit.
Some computers also had digital joysticks or gamepads available.
>>3170120
>who wants me to reveal how old I am?
>>3173335
There were gamepads that plug into the 15-pin game port on the PC, but I'm fairly sure those didn't exist until the Windows 9x era and that in the late 80s-early 90s, the only thing you could get for a PC were stuff like this.
>>3173595
Gravis Gamepad was available from 91
>>3173595
>>3173050
I found from testing various 80s PC games that the usability of the joysticks varied a lot. On some games, the joystick control just didn't work at all due to bad programming. Other games it worked excellently and almost as good as a digital Atari stick.
>>3173595
>>3173630
>bad programming
Whut.
>>3173637
The PC game port is kind of a nuisance to read from if you're used to the simple digital inputs on Atari sticks or a Nintendo controller. Basically, you have to poll the counters in the 201h register (via MOV DX,201h/IN AL,DX) and time how long it takes to count down to zero. It's also quite CPU intensive and eats up to 15% of your clock cycles.
Even worse than that, different joysticks, game port adapters, and clock speeds can affect the timing so you need to code routines that are insensitive to wide variances in the input values from the analog inputs.
>>3173630
Lode Runner, Shamus, and Cosmic Crusader worked great with joysticks. Archon, Ms. Pac-Man, and LucasArts adventures were ok but felt too leaden. Some Atarisoft games the joystick worked poorly or not at all.
I wonder why Windows never supported a joystick. Should be possible and back in the early days, mice weren't standard equipment with PCs.
>>3173746
Easy.
1. Microsoft wanted to sell mice
2. All PCs had a serial port to connect a mouse, but a game port was an extra cost option
I also found that cheesy Chinese joysticks were lighter and easier to use than high end sticks with like 10 buttons on them, most of which were like dragging a boat anchor (though I managed to eventually break all of those cheap joysticks).
>>3169560
Consoles were awful. I didn't buy one until the playstation came out. Now there was a console worth having.
>>3173749
>Microsoft wanted to sell mice
Microsoft started selling mice in 1996, the same year they started selling gamepads and joysticks.
>>3173595
>>3173762
>playstation
>shit framerates
>slow loading
>FMV
5th gen was a mistake
>>3173816
You must be 18 to use this website.
>>3173891
That's a bus mouse though. They also had serial mice with a 25 pin connector.
>>3169574
>Jazz Jackrabbit
Too fast.
>>3172831
>(during the mid-90s, normies began using computers again).
And now normies are leaving the computer scene for touch devices.
Desktop sales are in decline and the only thing keeping laptop sales stable is college students.
Many "laptops" sold today are really tablets with a keyboard attached by hinge.
I asked a young normie female if she had a computer.
Her reply was classic.
"Lol, my Iphone IS my computer"
>>3169560
Because PC development was more amateur. Console games often had actual artists doing the graphics, PC games usually just had the programmers doing it.
Everything people have said about PCs not having dedicated hardware for graphics is true, so you wouldn't have smooth scrolling or good framerates, but PCs definitely had higher resolutions by the early 90s. And non-PC computers had higher resolutions in the late 80s.
>>3174007
>Console games often had actual artists doing the graphics, PC games usually just had the programmers doing it.
They didn't have good tools and often very low budgets. Having said that, the better PC game devs like Microprose and Sierra did have professional artists.
>And non-PC computers had higher resolutions in the late 80s
Not really, no. By that time you had 640x480 VGA and early SVGA resolutions were also being developed.
>>3169560
Maybe because its windows
>>3174018
VGA was 640x480x4, and I think it was planar too. Both quite annoying for games. So MCGA/mode 13h was the way to go, and that's 320x200. Occasionally games would do non-standard resolutions, but that's rather rare
>>3174018
Certainly. Just giving a general answer based on a question that used a shareware game as reference.
And I meant that non-PC computers had higher resolutions than consoles since at least the mid 80s.
>>3174023
Duke Nukem was certainly not a Windows game
>>3174007
>Because PC development was more amateur
That depends. A lot of arcade ports were very amateurish while Microprose et al did have polished, professional products.
>>3174025
640x480x16 and yes it was planar, but I was only saying that PCs did have hi-res graphics by the late 80s, not that they were necessarily suitable for gaming.
>>3174031
Or if you're talking shovelware like Avoid The Noid, Wheel of Fortune, and all those Hi-Tech Expressions games, those were low budget shit one guy cobbled together in a couple of weeks.
>>3174039
One thing also you notice is that shovelware games usually had no copy protection while all of the proper game devs in the late 80s-early 90s used it. The games were probably so shitty that they didn't think anyone would bother pirating them.
>>3174038
so you were trying to be technically correct, without having an actual point, as the entire thread is in the context of GAMES.
Fuck off, asshole, fuck off.
>>3174039
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCTIErnqDpo
How about Beetlejuice? This actually has very nice graphics, unfortunately that's it. The rest of the game is poorly programmed shit.
>>3174031
Microprose is a good example, doing simulations and 4X stuff. Almost none of these games would work on a console, due to memory, save state or input restrictions
>>3174048
Didn't stop them from trying anyway.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cmq-gd9FiJI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdlQQJH0z3o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIBat_4DqzQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45ROoyZ7_sg
>>3174051
emphasis on "trying". Then again, "trying" is all a PC could do regarding platformers
>>3174047
They do seem to have had above-average graphics artists.
>implying
>>3174026
>And I meant that non-PC computers had higher resolutions than consoles since at least the mid 80s.
What is a non-PC computer? A mainframe or workstation? A video game console?
PCs have always had higher resolutions than consoles. The Apple II could do 280×192 while the Atari VCS only had de facto 160x192.
>>3174061
>Beetlejuice's red fingertips
>>3173819
>>3174176
PC = IBM compatible.
>>3174267
Not for me and I don't think that's what the op was talking about either since he compared them with consoles and not other home computers.
>>3174023
Which systems are showcased in this picture?
I'm guessing the top is Amiga and the bottom is CGA DOS with a different palette than the usual B/W/cyan/magenta.
>>3174278
If you're talking about old computers, that's what "PC"means.
>>3174278
"other home computers" tend to only matter to the poor bastards that had to use them. For everybody else it's IBM compatible vs consoles. The toys don't even enter the picture
>>3174290
Top is Amiga, middle is VGA (actually just EGA, but it changes the color palette on a VGA card) and CGA.
>>3174294
PC means personal computer, a computer for personal use be it at home or at work.
If you want to shorten "IBM PC and 100% compatible" then the correct solution was always IBM.
>>3174003
So? This isn't R9k.
Should a good, insightful post only appear once as a brief flicker and then never occur again?
DOTC actually came in three releases.
>CGA booter version
This does not work except on a real CGA card because it tweaks some of the registers to shake the screen while you're doing jousting tourneys. The game plays fine up to that point and then locks up, but the jousting tourneys are not required to beat the game.
>EGA/Tandy booter version
Extremely rare version as there were few copies of that sold.
>DOS version
Supports CGA/EGA/Tandy/Hercules and also pseudo-VGA.
>>3174335
>pseudo-VGA
what's that?
>>3174376
A few games also run in CGA mode and will change colors on an EGA card.
>F-15 Strike Eagle (v2 release)
>Earl Weaver Baseball (actually does support full 16 color EGA, but the tweaked palette CGA mode is there for low-spec machines as you need a 10Mhz or better CPU to run it decently in 16 color mode)
And Mine Shaft which actually came out in 84 for the PCjr. This doesn't actually have PCjr support per-se, it's running in CGA mode and changes palettes via INT 10h Function 10h.
Now, this game predates EGA however INT 10h Function 10h was actually introduced on the PCjr first before EGA arrived, so the palette change still works correctly on EGA/VGA (a real CGA card will just give you the default pink/white/aqua colors)
>>3173902
>wang
I still have a load of 5.25" floppies by them. And Parrot, Dysan, Nashua, Rhone-Poulenc Systems, etc... I wish I could read them.
>>3174436
I thought that was Digger for a sec.
>>3169560
Western devs were shit at the time (and still kinda are)
>>3174707
What computers are they for.
>>3175804
Most of them are Apple II disks, I have a few for Kaypro machines as well and I think there's a TRS-80 disk in there but not sure.
>>3175486
Uses CGA Mode 5 (actually the color burst bit in 3D8h disabled) which shows up as those colors on a RGB monitor.
>>3175814
The Kaypro and TRS-80 disks are readable by a PC if you have a 5.25" drive and a program to read the file systems.
>Apple II disks
>implying
>>3175819
Unless they're TRS-80 Model I disks which are single density so only some PCs can read them.
A workstation is an exhorbitantly expensive unix box made with mostly proprietary hardware by a company like Sun, SGI, or NeXT.
Workstations are not produced anymore. Modern xeon "workstations" are just PCs with the most expensive parts.
Many (but not all) personal home computers did not have specialized components for the processing of graphics. Even when 2D accelerator cards appeared, unless there was an API that could actually tap into them (e.g. DirectDraw) that power would often go to waste. So it meant that in many situations the CPU would have to do an inordinate amount of work. Same was true for 3D before accelerator cards - software mode Quake is an almost full CPU show.
For a good 3D example, contrast this to the N64. It had three major processors:
-A RISC CPU known as the MIPS R4300i runnings at around 94mhz. This processor wasn't superscalar like a Pentium was (integer and floats can't run simultaneously), so its performance is similar to a slightly overclocked Intel 486DX4.
So far, PCs have the advantage, since your typical 1996 PC was equipped with something like a Pentium 90 which clock-for-clock is quite a fair bit superior that older non-superscalar units.
- A vector unit processor called RSP
This is a SIMD unit that accelerates vector processing used in polygon transform and lighting. Although it is incapable of general processing like a CPU, it is incredibly efficient at operations to do with vectors - what takes a regular CPU several cycles might only take a single cycle here.
In short, this vector unit running at 63mhz would have vector-specific performance competitive or even better than a Pentium running at 200mhz. PCs eventually got something like this starting from the GeForce 256 card, while Silicon Graphics Workstations have had vector units for a long time before.
- A rasterizing/texturing/filtering/blending/combining pixel pipeline chip known as RDP
The equivalent to this would be like your S3 Virge or 3Dfx Voodoo for PC. No need for me to tell you what this does. The N64's one is better than the Virge but weaker than the Voodoo.
But as you know, if you don't have one for PC then it's gotta do software rendering, putting the entire pipeline's load on your CPU.
>>3170127
>summerfags
>April
>>3175819
Some systems such as the Tandy 2000 used quad density disks (80 track DD). These are readable on a PC with a 1.2MB drive.
>>3169576
That already started happening in the early 90s. No matter what kind of hardware a console launched with, PCs would zip past it quickly.
>>3170913
Out of all the games he listed only Lucasarts games, Dragonstrike and Populous were on the Amiga.
>>3170934
>They're Japanese, so they must be shit!
>>3172069
The X68000 is at least today known only for being a gaming system.
>>3172831
>the removal of personal computers from the casual market for a decade (during the mid-90s, normies began using computers again).
Is there no limit to how much people will project the modern day casual/hardcore distinction into the past?
>>3174296
Commodore systems were vastly better for gaming up until the early 90s.
>>3175914
>Is there no limit to how much people will project the modern day casual/hardcore distinction into the past?
It was though. Actually the TRS-80 Model I was the first "casual" computer since it was also the first personal computer that most normies ever knew about (anyone could walk into a Radio Shack and see one on display). Thousands of them were sold to people who didn't know anything about computers.
The video game crash wiped out the casual market. During the late 80s-early 90s, computers were largely a neckbeard thing and only with the event of multimedia in mid-decade did the casual market come back (Myst was a large part of that).
>>3169576
this guy's actually got a point. it really wasn't until VGA, soundcards, and dos memory extenders started to become standard that pc gaming performance was competing with dedicated videogame hardware.
home computers were sold generally as productivity/business machines with gaming being a bonus feature up until about 1990-1991.
not saying there werent good pc games prior to that, it's just they were a different kind and usually didn't look as nice.
>>3169560
>hating on classic duke
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6Osnolfxqw
You could already play games like this with amiga 500 in 1989
Commandore US was a really horrible company unfortunately and really destroyed amiga brandmark.
>>3175951
>compared with console games of the era.
I don't think OP is hating it but yeah, Douk 1 came out in 1991. It looks like something the Master System could have done in 1987.
>>3169890
>Small, often amateurish products done by only a bunch of dudes in their sparetime
that's a pretty good description of indie
>>3175914
>The X68000 is at least today known only for being a gaming system.
Big deal, so's the Apple II yet it was widely used as a work computer back in the day.
>>3173023
most console games are just boring console junk
>>3175961
>Commandore US was a really horrible company unfortunately
Especially in how they completely destroyed the home computer market in the US just to spite their old enemy Texas Instruments.
>>3175961
It looks and sounds great for a game that was contemporary with Alex Kidd in the Enchanted Castle, Chip's Challenge, and Gradius III, but I was never really a fan of its mishmash of aesthetics, the jerky enemy animation, or the hitboxes.
>>3175961
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQm68Aln3YA
C64 version also looks fantastic.
>>3176113
>PYSGNOSIS
>>3170127
It was meant to be stretched vertically.
http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/Aspect_ratio
>>3169883
GOD! THANK YOU, anon. I always thought this was PAC MAN 2. I probably had it under the name Pac Man 2. The spiders SCARED THE HELL OUT OF ME. Like I was really afraid of those and the dying animation was so brutal as well. I was shocked as a kid. I never beat the shark level so I was amazed to see that there is a space level after it- I've to admit I think the Space level looks lame though.
>>3169883
This game uses EGA hi-res mode which was common in share/freeware games but commercial games hardly ever used it.
>>3176105
Yeah, gameplay is pretty nuts. it is not that good game but visually amazing. There better amiga games but this one was one of the first show what can be done on amiga.
>>3176225
>it is not that good game but visually amazing
apt description of every amiga "classic"
>>3175962
>It looks like something the Master System could have done in 1987.
Yeah you clearly you don't know shit
Duke Nukum is one of the best, feature-packed games ever made for an IBM PC!
It beats Nintendo easily!
Duke Nukum features: Incredible animation, one megabyte of graphics, dual scrolling playfields, arcade sound effects and much much more!
>>3176332
>apt description of every amiga "classic"
Not quite.
>>3170546
Doom is absolutely NOT just one game. There was Doom, Doom2 and Final Doom, and Heretic, Hexen and Strife.
And then, just sticking in that little corner, zeroing in on the itty bitty MAIN company responsible for churning out those console style games that are so irresistible for you to grasp towards to attempt to compare the platforms, you also have the build engine.
From that one safe little corner you people resign yourselves to picking on!
>>3170120
You didn't. You had to get two extra monitors, and network them together using the -left and -right command line parameters for that.
This game...looks like it should be good but it plays like a slide show
>>3175928
Computers did not stop being used for work, and people who used them for work could also play games.
>>3176558
>Duke Nukum features: Incredible animation, one megabyte of graphics, dual scrolling playfields, arcade sound effects and much much more!
And art assets from Turrican and Megaman.
Remember this one?
The gameplay and physics were way off, but the graphics were good.
>>3178080
This was apparently a demo for a smooth scrolling engine the programmer wrote.
>>3176804
>implying FPSes aren't "one game"
>>3178265
By that logic SNES has like 4 or 5 games total.
>>3178080
Took a while before he got it right, wasnt until charlie 2 that his jumping wasnt all over the place.
>>3169689
I also liked the early Duke Nukem games. There was a similar game I played as share ware called Hocus Pocus, where you were a little harry potter type wizard student fuckin shit up. That game was dope.
>>3179295
loved the autofire. it felt powerful
>be msdos
>want into mario brothers
>wont let me
>fuck you big N
>I'll get blues brothers.
