Traumatised by this morning's trip to the supermarket (still no tube socks!), I decided to detox with a session on my PC Engine. I never had one of these bitd, but thanks to the magic that is the Turbo Everdrive, I now have access to the full back-catalogue of hu-cards. Without the rose tinted spectacles of nostalgia, it's plain to see that there was a lot of guff on the system. But there are also plenty of games that must have been astounding when they come out. 'Gradius' isn't just arcade perfect, it's better than the arcade, with a beefed up sound track and the ability to pause. R-Type is pretty impressive too, as are Parasol Stars and Pac-Land. The range and quality of arcade shooters in particular is very good indeed. What's less than impressive, imho, is the D-Pad. Gotta say it chaps, but I really can't stand console D-Pads. Coming from the arcade world of joysticks and buttons, they've always struck me an aberration. As good as the PC Engine port of Raiden might be, it's ruined by the D-Pad :-(
But that got me thinking about the systems I did have. I suppose the Amiga would be about the closest in terms of release date and 'floruit' (!). The Amiga-era Zip-Sticks and Competition Pro 5000s may have looked the part, but the truth is they were very pale immitations of the arcade control panels. And the more you dig, the worse it gets. The Amiga itself might have knocked spots off the C64. But compared to the PC Engine, it was... weak. OK, so it could play sampled sounds, but so what? Did they ever *really* add that much to the gameplay? The things that counted, like screen size, game resolution, the number of colours and sprites on-screen just couldn't complete. The thing is, though, that the Amiga wasn't cheap. My 'what if' question is, what if the team behind the Amiga had just dumped the gimmicks (who really cared about HAM graphics?), and basically stuck a disk drive and a keyboard on a PC Engine? AmIright?
The more I think about it, the more the business geniuses behind home computers messed it up. They treated the concept of the video game as a dirty word. Imagine they hadn't, and had gone for an amiga-priced games machine optimised to play arcade games rather than multi-task spreadsheets with juggling ball-men. I reckon they would have shifted a lot more units and kept their companies going at least a few year longer...
What do you guys think?
But that got me thinking about the systems I did have. I suppose the Amiga would be about the closest in terms of release date and 'floruit' (!). The Amiga-era Zip-Sticks and Competition Pro 5000s may have looked the part, but the truth is they were very pale immitations of the arcade control panels. And the more you dig, the worse it gets. The Amiga itself might have knocked spots off the C64. But compared to the PC Engine, it was... weak. OK, so it could play sampled sounds, but so what? Did they ever *really* add that much to the gameplay? The things that counted, like screen size, game resolution, the number of colours and sprites on-screen just couldn't complete. The thing is, though, that the Amiga wasn't cheap. My 'what if' question is, what if the team behind the Amiga had just dumped the gimmicks (who really cared about HAM graphics?), and basically stuck a disk drive and a keyboard on a PC Engine? AmIright?
The more I think about it, the more the business geniuses behind home computers messed it up. They treated the concept of the video game as a dirty word. Imagine they hadn't, and had gone for an amiga-priced games machine optimised to play arcade games rather than multi-task spreadsheets with juggling ball-men. I reckon they would have shifted a lot more units and kept their companies going at least a few year longer...
What do you guys think?