Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!pacbell.com!pacbell!indetech!vsi1!zorch!amiga0!mykes From: mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer Subject: Re: Lemmings - a tutorial Part IV Message-ID: Date: 30 Mar 91 08:49:33 GMT References: <1991Mar25.050519.29068@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> Organization: Amiga makes it possible Lines: 76 In article nj@magnolia.Berkeley.EDU (Narciso Jaramillo) writes: >rjc@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu said: > >> >Games of Adventure and Skill capture my >> >attention far more than 'blast-anything-that-moves including those >> >blitter objects that take up half the screen and lots of ram, but look >> >very pretty' > >mykes@sega0.SF-Bay.ORG replied: > >> You don't need an Amiga to play those kind of games. > >No. On the other hand, I already have an Amiga. > >The analogy is flawed, of course, but here's my point: There are lots >of people who bought Amigas because they were game machines. On the >other hand, there are lots of people who bought Amigas because they >could be both game machines and productivity machines. If you have a >game that *a priori* can only be targeted to the first set of people >because it *absolutely requires* you to take over the machine, fine. >However, if you have a game that does not absolutely require you to >take over the machine, and it does anyway, you're pissing off the >second group unnecessarily. > The point I am making is that the first group is by far the majority of sales, and the second is a puny total. I don't make Amiga 2000 games, I make Amiga 500 games. I don't make 1Meg games, I make 512K games. Despite the fact that I am certainly geared toward the A500, I am curteous enough to support the rest of the Amiga family. Now, if there was a market for Amiga 3000 games, it sure would be fun. I would love to use the OS and make things more friendly because I knew I had more horsepower/RAM/Hard disk. When you can EXPECT these things, they influence the design. Sales/marketing data shows that software that works well on the A500 get 38% higher sales. >That was the point of the Lemmings posts. You *should* work hard to >make it OS-friendly, because you're programming an Amiga. Only when >it's absolutely impossible to avoid taking over the machine should you >do so. The latter should be reserved for games that need to be whizzy >in order to be playable. Those of us who like less whizzy but very >playable games shouldn't be left out in the cold. > I'm sorry, but what I saw in the Lemmings posts was appalling. More than once it was suggested that various features of the game/design be removed for the sake of OS friendliness. You are going to get less for the same money and less than what the Amiga is capable of using that approach. I just don't like to settle for less. I am not in TOTAL disagreement with those who want OS friendly games. I do think that a few classes of games can support the OS just fine. I am talking about games like LARN or HACK. If you want something like these games, get Mike Farren to do them. If you want something like TV Sports Football but with 3 or 4 times the frame rate/responsiveness, ask me to do it. Did you ever see Microsoft's flight simulator for the C64? It had a frame rate of 2 frames/sec. Did you ever see Wings on the Amiga 500? It has a frame rate of 2 frames/sec also. Wings did not have more processing to do than flight simulator did... What a shame! I am merely an advocate of the Amiga outperforming the C64. I constantly point to SOTB because it does outperform the C64. If all games were done with this approach, the state of games on the Amiga would be better off. > > >nj -- ******************************************************** * Appendix A of the Amiga Hardware Manual tells you * * everything you need to know to take full advantage * * of the power of the Amiga. And it is only 10 pages! * ********************************************************