The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
> Could you call Super Mario World 'Retro'? Now that was a superb
> game...
I dont think theres any hard and fast rule about when a game becomes a retro title... but given that SuperMario world is what, about 10 years old now? I would have thought it fitted the bill...
I wouldnt like to hazard a guess when games stop being contemporary, and start being retro, but the MegaDrive/SNES/GameGear, etc.. should be more than comfortably under the retro umbrarella?
> No it wasn't. The Amiga was poor in making graphics and the special
> package used to create the graphics for Babylon 5 only ran on a souped
> up Amiga. (This being the Amiga 1200 which was far too expensive for
> mere schoolboys) The actual 3-D package was so big that it came on
> nearly 100 3.5" disks! I can remember a teacher of mine having to
> upgrade his Amiga with extra memory just to run the program. And then
> it took weeks just to program the model in. Yes, i suppose it had
> better graphics but would you want to wait for over 3 hours while the
> actual program loaded?
Not at all, though the Amiga 1200 was a later model Amiga made for the home market..
It was running by and large off of floppies, so loading times for games were longer than for cartridge systems, but certinaly not 3-hours... maybe 30-45 seconds (that would be for an app designed to run off of a HDD)...
I was using the modelling program as an example of how the Amigas graphics were superior to the MegaDrive/SNES... not a direct comparison to Sonic the Hedgehog :)
Unbeliever wrote:
> This being the Amiga 1200 which was far too expensive for
> mere schoolboys
The standard A500 had superior graphics to MegaDrive and SNES, in number displayable colours, screen resolutions, ability to throw images around the screen, etc...
Unbeliever wrote:
> No it wasn't. ...
> Yes, i suppose it had
> better graphics
make your mind up :)
> Could you call Super Mario World 'Retro'? Now that was a superb
> game...
No. Not in any way or form. Retro to me means classics on the Speccy/C64/NES/Master System. Anything older are just great games.
> JDXpolygon wrote:
> Even the
> 32-Bit Amiga 1200 with it's AGA only titles couldn't produce perfect
> reproductions of the same MD & SNES games.
>
> What are you talking about?
>
> The Amiga had far superiour graphic capibilities... The old standard
> example being that all the graphics for the TV programme Babylon5 were
> made using an Amiga... The Amiga was a real graphics powerhouse in its
> day.
No it wasn't. The Amiga was poor in making graphics and the special package used to create the graphics for Babylon 5 only ran on a souped up Amiga. (This being the Amiga 1200 which was far too expensive for mere schoolboys) The actual 3-D package was so big that it came on nearly 100 3.5" disks! I can remember a teacher of mine having to upgrade his Amiga with extra memory just to run the program. And then it took weeks just to program the model in. Yes, i suppose it had better graphics but would you want to wait for over 3 hours while the actual program loaded?
It's still entertaining now, and you actually improve at it when you get drunk. What more could you ask for in a game that has less coding than is in Mario's left little finger?
> Even the
> 32-Bit Amiga 1200 with it's AGA only titles couldn't produce perfect
> reproductions of the same MD & SNES games.
What are you talking about?
The Amiga had far superiour graphic capibilities... The old standard example being that all the graphics for the TV programme Babylon5 were made using an Amiga... The Amiga was a real graphics powerhouse in its day.