Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!clyde.concordia.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!ists!yunexus!geac!torsqnt!tmsoft!becker!cbmtor!sjorr
From: sjorr@cbmtor.UUCP (Stephen Orr)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Multitasking is slower
Message-ID: <121@cbmtor.UUCP>
Date: 9 Jun 90 00:27:46 GMT
Reply-To: sjorr@cbmtor.UUCP (Stephen Orr)
Distribution: comp
Organization: SandIsoft
Lines: 30

I would like to point out at this point that we all live in a capitalist
world, and this discussion of Multitasking vs. non-Multitasking games is
quite simple to resolve.

I personally am a developer on the Amiga, and see the merits of games which
will multitask. I also enjoy F18, and others which don't. Each has it's place
on my system, some I use while downloading/uploading. Some I use just to have
fun, I'll let you guess which is which.

In the long run however, if non-Multitasking games were SOOO bad, then the
companies that insist on producing then would go bankrupt, and it doesn't
look like they are.

In the end if YOU don't like a non-multitasking game then don't buy it.
Personally I don't play an awful lot of games, and base my purchases
purely on the entertainment, and quality with which the program succeeds
in whatever it was designed to do. If that means taking over the machine to
fly a jet fight at god-forsaken speeds, and I choose to buy it then fine.

More important than the multitasking issue is the CPU issue. Programs which
force me to boot with both fingers on the mouse, and don't allow me to play
with the 030, do anoy me. At least F18 doesn't have this problem.

					Stephen Orr
					SandIsoft
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any association between me and Commodore is purely a coincidence of me      
owning an Amiga, I have nothing to do with Commodore Canada, and my         
opinions are those of my employer...ie: I'm self employed                   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------