Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

45 Excellent

About Crazyace

  • Rank

Contact / Social Media

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    London / HK / Tokyo / San Fransisco
  • Interests
    2600 programming<br />All things Atari..<br />PS3 optimisation
  1. I think that the panther also would have a problem due to the lack of colour - the line buffer only supports 32 colours per line - less than the 64 colours ( more with shadow/highlight ) on MegaDrive. Also a 16 pixel sprite would be 4 longs in ramfor the control (8 cycles ) + 4 words of ROM data ( 16 cycles ) - given 1024 cycles per line this allows 42 sprites per line - more than the MegaDrive, but without any background screens...
  2. This website is quite interesting http://www.amigahistory.plus.com/sales.html It shows the breakdown as almost 10 to 1 in favour of the cheap A500 model, which just shows how the market had moved on The ST had the foresight to implement the b/w mode - that was a failing of the amiga tying it completely to NTSC - given the price of the A1000 support of a workstation monitor ( No VGA in 1985 ) output with non interlaced 640x480 @ 60Hz would have been amazing - even if it was limited to 4 colours it would still be better than the ST. Maybe the Amiga would have been better as a bare bones machine - a super C64 rather than a new multitasking windowed machine. As well as the games, lot's of the definiing titles such as DPAINT weren't really windowed apps anyway
  3. If the Amiga had shipped with mixed chip and fast ram it might have helped things a bit - the original A1000 could have been 256K fast plus 256K chip - and that would allow the 640x240 16 colour modes to be used without slowing down the cpu at all. It would have been a lot easier to make new models with faster cpu's - or even move the video circuitry onto a card in the A2000's to more directly compete with the IBM PC
  4. You could look here I guess: http://atariage.com/forums/topic/15557-jaguar-ii-tech-ref/
  5. Expansion on cart would be nice - It might actually be better to only have 'chip rom' instead , The Amiga 1000 used up to four banks of 128K chip ram ( 2 on board, 2 in expansion ) so something similar could be used to allow 3 possible 128k areas on the cart.
  6. Hi Carlsson, I'm not worried about the price too much. It was being designed as a console, so I'm just assuming it must have been possible to price as one.
  7. Having FAST and CHIP on the cart port would complicate things. I was thinking that 68k only rom could be slow, and still work at the same time as chipset ram accesses
  8. Hi Bill, I'm not making any assumptions really, just following up the comments by one of the original designers ( Joe Decuir in the video ) about the Amiga being designed for 32k as a console ( I'm guessing that 128K was the computer version shown in 1984 ). Whether an Amiga computer from Commodore would actually happen if the console had been picked up is a completely different question. It's not as if the NES sold amazingly well in it's first year anyway - and that was in a market where it was technically superior. In 1985 Nintendo didn't have all of the US developers locked in. Also an Amiga console may not have been a commodore product ( If Commodore had announced a console they would have produced software - after all, there would be no intuition or Amigados required, so companies like EA would have been offered gamedev opportunities with the lorraine devkits in baremetal mode ) There's no argument that it would win , but it would be in the market in 1985, with way superior technology - at the same time as the initial NES launch with ROB and duckhunt Cart memory as chip would be nice - but I think better as 'fast', If code is running from ROM there wouldn't be as many stalls, I was thinking that graphics would be copied from ROM to the 32k ram via movem.l sequences - and only the actual writes would actually stall, ( after all on the ST the CPU handles all graphics, and still there were games running at 60Hz )
  9. I would counter that 1985 would be a viable launch - this isn't an Amiga computer, i expect it would be a lot cheaper as a bare bones console. Given the timeline where the h/w was near complete in 1984 for the computer , there would still be a year for software dev. In that situation an Amiga console would launch against the early NES - and in my opinion a 32KB '7800 style' amiga would outperform the NES dramatically.... I dont know how this would have affected the Amiga computer. I'm actually thinking more about this technically. - In terms of games though I think an Amiga console would actually get better games, as there would be no Atari ST ports that dont use the hardware. Given better hardware in the US market would the NES have managed to dominate as much as they did? I assume a 32K Amiga would be more expensive to build than the 4K NES , but the 5200 already had 16K of ram , so it would be possible to price as a console for $299 As Awhite2600 says, it would need programming tricks to work with only 32KB of chip ram.... that's what is interesting to me. I expect that a lot more software would rely on the hardware sprites - and the lack of memory for double buffering or blitter object data would be challenging. But the 2600 only had 128 bytes after all, and 32KB is more than the 4K on the NES, ( and the 8K+16K of the Master system )
  10. You should disregard both the CDTV and CD32 from this discussion - they both arrived much later ( 1991 and 1993 ) and were based on Amiga computers. I'm thinking of a 1985 launch where it would compare to the NES and 7800 at launch ( and non launch for the 7800 ) I doubt it would have the same reception as the XEGS - that was old technology way behind the competition - Amiga was state of the art technology in 1985.
  11. I'm guessing the 32K comment from Joe Decuir would be for a console in the 1985 timeframe - so competing against the NES. I think that even with 32K an Amiga cartridge machine would provide much better games - Marble Madness would be pretty much the same as it was on the real Amiga for example. With 128K and carts there would be room for almost all of the effects that people used on the 512k Amiga computers.
  12. I was watching the excellent video about the Amiga design, and one comment here was interesting https://youtu.be/DOo1HA66BWw?t=413 An Amiga games console with only 32K of chip ram. It would be interesting how this would have looked to the market, and the kinds of programming tricks that would have been needed. I think, even with 32K it would have competed with the NES and SMS. For scrolling - 336x192x8 colours would fit in 24k , leaving 8k for h/w sprites and Copper lists A pseudo colour mode could be implemented by replicating some plane data over multiple lines... 336x192x2 for 2 full screen bitplanes + 336x(192/4)x2 would give 16 colours using 1x by 4y 'attributes' in 20k The CPU would be busy copying data from cartridge rom ( like fast ram) to chip ram for graphics updates during vblank, and any blitting would need to chase the beam as double buffering would need too much ram to be practical.
  13. I don't think the ram cost was that important - Atari just didn't sell enough systems at the launch price, and publishers weren't willing to commit. Would it have made that much difference to the games? Also I dont think the price was the issue at launch. Having 2MB ram would be important for a CD only console - You can easily take 450K just for a double buffered 320x240 16 bit screen + Z buffer. The slipstream would have trouble matching the SNES graphics capabilities in 2D , although it may have made a better StarFox
  14. A VCS computer hack wouldn't compete with the Vic20 even if it contained a built in supercharger, and it would be more expensive than the zx80 ( let alone the zx81 ) There should have been low cost versions of the 400 at that time, ( something like the 5200 board with a cheap keyboard )
  • Create New...