Getting this off my chest: unbalanced content

[FatTrucker]

But enough about that - I thought the "PC" was a current platform so how do you rate sw running (natively) on it as retro? Genuinely curious.

Take a DOS game or even something designed for Windows 95. Install it onto your PC running Vista or Windows 7, spend fruitless hours trying to get it working then admit defeat and resort to emulation.

PC generations can be pretty accurately defined by the native OS as well as the hardware. An old PC or old PC game is just as Retro as the console titles that were released in the same era.

[killermike]

In issue #71, I wrote a feature about DOS gaming, and I tried to address some of the reasons that it's a neglected retro platform. As I said then, I think it comes down to a lack of attachment to a memorable image. Most PC owners were on an upgrade treadmill for one thing. The machines themselves were also a bit fiddly to operate, and I can see why the consoles are a bit more attractive to collect for.

The platform itself is great, however. Generally, it lags behind dedicated home computers in the graphics and sound department until the VGA era. However, I don't understand the argument that it wasn't worth bothering with until that point, particularly when we're discussing it on a retro forum. Even when it lagged behind technically, DOS still enjoyed plenty of great releases. I'm not going to link directly from the forum, but google for DOS abanonware and see how much stuff there was. Windows PCs quickly got way ahead of the Playstation, and I'd say that it was still a platform worth following. What technical advantages does the MD have over the SNES? Is the MD rubbish?

By the time the 386 was common, such a machine with a soundcard was about the best machine you could get if you were a fan of simulations, adventure games, etc. If you were into shooters and platform games you'd have to be a bit mad not to be running a SNES or MD. I'd agree that the Amiga remained the most well-rounded gaming machine of that time, and unfortunately, you needed to be able to invest about 1,200-1,500 quid into a PC.

Personally, as a bottom feeder, the PC has always been good to me. I've never had much money as an adult, and when I started again with computers, I picked up a 386 for about 200 quid. Since then, I've upgraded it like Trigger's broom in Only Fools and Horses. Another way that I got into PC gaming was via emulation.

[killermike]

Re: the anti-MS sentiment.

Commodore and Acorn and all the others did cause a lot of their own problems. However, it should be noted that MS drove most of their competitors out of business by consistently breaking law by abusing the positions in which they had established a monopoly. Unfortunately, the official action taken against them by their own government consisted only of monetary fines which were meaningless against such a big company. I think that's what a lot of the anti-MS sentiment stems from. Perhaps they could have got ahead, fair and square, by offering something better and more competitive, but in actual fact, they got ahead by cheating.

Some might argue that regulation couldn't have held them back and given their competitors a fighting chance. However, it's clear that the actions taken against MS by the EU in the area of browsers has had a profound effect. Firefox is now slightly ahead of a IE in regions where the regulations are enforced.

[Fred83]

Lets look at some amiga adverts from the early to late 90s - http://www.amigahistory.co.uk/adverts/adverts.html

[webding]

You lot are mental

Ok, I paraphrased, but I have to agree with the general sentiment. How anyone can get so wound up about a gaming format or software company is beyond me; it's the sort of misguided passion that started wars. Thank Christ the lax security in Wargames was pure fiction, or we'd have two yellowing A600s and a broken CD32 launching nukes on Seattle.

As for the freelance writing bit - how does that work? Does everything have to be pitched first, or could you write something (or part of something), send it in and see what happens? Do you need a body of work to point at?

I'm not sure why I'm asking, mind. The only thing I'd be able to muster is some sort of "where is he now?" expose on Stuart N. Hardy.

[CraigGrannell]

As for the freelance writing bit - how does that work? Does everything have to be pitched first

Yes.

or could you write something (or part of something), send it in and see what happens?

No. Depending on Imagine's terms (which I can't recall), either they'd own your unsolicited submission outright, or they wouldn't take said submissions.

Do you need a body of work to point at?

Preferably, yes. There's not much point in saying you want to write about something, unless you can prove to Darran you can write. And another big tip for wannabe Retro Gamer contributors: if you pitch a making-of or interview to Darran, make damn sure you're in touch with the person or people in question first. Don't just fire over a wish list, because he has enough on his plate to deal with.

[pforson]

An Amiga can have a 2Tb drive (I have a 3Gb in my A1200 and its more than I need), 256Mb of Fast RAM (I couldn't use up all the 32Mb at once in my A1200 when I tried, as it was much more efficient), processor upgrades, graphics cards to ramp up the resolution, had proper multi-tasking, proper plug and play, hardware sprites, quick boot up, no messing with IRQs/config files etc. to run programs, multiple resolutions on the same screen, immediate response to clicks in Workbench (that XP still can't do, same with drawing the contents of windows), multiple screen handling (virtual screens, not physical), the ability to output to TVs and have genlocks for video work, CD drives, printers, scanners, joysticks, zip drives, etc. I'm not sure what other expandibility you would need. Of course it can be in a tower case, too, instead of spread all over the desk like mine is

I'm fully aware of how powerful one can make an Amiga, but did anyone seriously have a machine that spec in '92? - I doubt it, because there wasn't any software at the time that would have required it! - was it even possible back then?

I don't see why when I give an opinion on what I actually saw with my own eyes, I'm "making ridiculous statements", but you can say something that sound like a factual statement "PC was brilliant in the early 90's and anyone who says otherwise is a fool" and "It really wasn't" when I say I thought the PC was a step backwards. I don't accuse you or anyone else of anything, as it's your opinion and we are all entitled to them.

As I stated before. What riled me was the fact that you felt you needed to start comparing the PC to the Amiga in a thread about the PC. I have not and would not go into an Amiga thread and start shooting off about how I felt the PC was a better machine. I would simply discuss the Amiga.

We've just have to disagree on this.

Agreed.

[Fred83]

An Amiga can have a 2Tb drive (I have a 3Gb in my A1200 and its more than I need), 256Mb of Fast RAM (I couldn't use up all the 32Mb at once in my A1200 when I tried, as it was much more efficient), processor upgrades, graphics cards to ramp up the resolution, had proper multi-tasking, proper plug and play, hardware sprites, quick boot up, no messing with IRQs/config files etc. to run programs, multiple resolutions on the same screen, immediate response to clicks in Workbench (that XP still can't do, same with drawing the contents of windows), multiple screen handling (virtual screens, not physical), the ability to output to TVs and have genlocks for video work, CD drives, printers, scanners, joysticks, zip drives, etc. I'm not sure what other expandibility you would need. Of course it can be in a tower case, too, instead of spread all over the desk like mine is

I'm fully aware of how powerful one can make an Amiga, but did anyone seriously have a machine that spec in '92? - I doubt it, because there wasn't any software at the time that would have required it! - was it even possible back then?

I think it was yes,but rarely games of that time made use of it,apps of course would had made use,irony of it all,id software never bothered with amiga,probably to think that doom/quake couldn't had being done on amiga,years later ports appeared on it.

I like to think the third party accelerator cards such as those from phase 5 kept the life support machine on for amiga in mid 90s.

[necronom]

As I stated before. What riled me was the fact that you felt you needed to start comparing the PC to the Amiga in a thread about the PC. I have not and would not go into an Amiga thread and start shooting off about how I felt the PC was a better machine. I would simply discuss the Amiga.

There were 6 topics listed in the first post. One was about the PC one was about the Amiga. They were both related to one another. That's why I mentioned both.

[NorthWay]

It evolved over time into what we have today and those earlier stages of evolution can be considered retro in the same way their contemporaries are.

(It=pc)
RG might want to think it through _now_: What makes a Windows platform game retro?
The moment the games went away from writing to a hw specification and instead wrote to an API was when "incompatible" became a whole lot less probable. Microsoft has a lot invested in their APIs ruling the world. An API can be fixed behind the curtains to work on a newer platform and keep on working for decades (check out IBM mainframes some time).

My prediction = If RG is alive and well we will, some day, see PS2/PS3 games covered as classics while being perfectly able to play much earlier games on whatever future Windows platform rules the day.

[FatTrucker]

My prediction = If RG is alive and well we will, some day, see PS2/PS3 games covered as classics while being perfectly able to play much earlier games on whatever future Windows platform rules the day.

If someone buys a 2600 for the first time tomorrow and starts playing games on it, are those games retro or contemporary?, its the same thing with PC games, games are married to the era they are developed and sold in. Once that era has passed they stand alongside their retro contemporaries on other platforms of the day. I can still play just about any game from any era (and any system) on my PC thanks to the miracle (praise Jeebus) of emulation, they're still old though.

[NorthWay]

I can still play just about any game from any era (and any system) on my PC thanks to the miracle (praise Jeebus) of emulation, they're still old though.

And they are indeed, but so far (IMO) RG has been defining retro by the platform being obsoleted.

Old <> Retro ?

[FatTrucker]

I can still play just about any game from any era (and any system) on my PC thanks to the miracle (praise Jeebus) of emulation, they're still old though.

And they are indeed, but so far (IMO) RG has been defining retro by the platform being obsoleted.

Old <> Retro ?

Groovy, just let me know which publishers are currently releasing games at retail for DOS, and where to buy a brand new 286 with windows 3.1 or 95 then.
Even some stuff designed for XP won't run natively on 7, and AFAIK just about everything developed for DOS and Win95 needs to be emulated.

[Bub&Bob]

If someone buys a 2600 for the first time tomorrow and starts playing games on it, are those games retro or contemporary?

Nah, just crap

[Darran@Retro Gamer]

I can still play just about any game from any era (and any system) on my PC thanks to the miracle (praise Jeebus) of emulation, they're still old though.

And they are indeed, but so far (IMO) RG has been defining retro by the platform being obsoleted.

Old <> Retro ?

Actually we define retro by a 10 year gap, so any hardware or games released up to 2001 are fair game for coverage in the magazine. It's still kind of a judgement call though, which is why the last generation (with the exception of the Dreamcast) only gets covered a spread an issue). Ultimately it doesn't really matter though, because everyone has their own idea of what constitutes retro