/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.3968649]

Were PC gamers edgelords back in the days like nowadays? I can't remember PC gaming really being a thing, since I always had home consoles just like my friends.

Nowadays, PC gaming is seen as "superior" and PC gamers call themselves the "master race". I've never seen anything like this in the past.

[Anonymous No.3968669]

>>3968649

Its because you didnt have the internet back then

[Anonymous No.3968673]

>>3968649
Dunno, have you always been an egdelord?

[Anonymous No.3968674]

>>3968649
>Nowadays, PC gaming is seen as "superior" and PC gamers call themselves the "master race".
Most people do this ironically to mess up with you. Some are genuine idiots, but these are in every community.

[Anonymous No.3968686]

It was even worse back then.

[Anonymous No.3968690]

I remember reading some old newsgroups posts from the mid 90s, and it was like that, I was astonished, but it was funny as fuck.

[Anonymous No.3968691]

Console games were even more crippled and restricted than they are now since console hardware was severely underpowered (seriously, the original Xbox, being the "most powerful" console of its generation, had a pathetic 64mb of RAM).

[Anonymous No.3968697]

>>3968649
There was some PC gaming mag back in the 90s that would also try to take a shit on console gaming whenever the oppurtunity arose. There was this one situation in particular that stuck out for me in the letters section.
This pretty chill guy wrote in about how he dug the Dreamcast. Well, the editor went into this autistic, frothing rant about how the Dreamcast was a piece of shit, ect. Pretty cringeworthy to say the least. Strangely enough one of the staff's favorite games of all time was Virtua Tennis.
Then there were the PCFX ads in EGM "why you playin' on consoles, kids? Lol". Sad and the FX card guys responsible soon went bankrupt.
Console gamers seemed pretty apathetic to PC games back then, while the more extreme PC fans would lashout for attention.

[Anonymous No.3968714]

>>3968649
the terms ''pc gamer'' and ''console gamer'' didn't exist back than as far as I remember most people I knew had both, but mostly played on consoles, because they had a better library and while the n64 for example could play 3d games, pc could only play 2,5d games like doom and so

they always had pros and cons, but I never really gave a shit because I always had both and still do

[Anonymous No.3968715]

>>3968649
PC master race is master race. The latest consoles do 1080p at 30fps if you're lucky enough to be play a game that supports it. A half way decent gaming PC will do 4K at 60 and render more of everything, rain, grass, whatever. They largely gave up on cross platform between consoles and PCs because the consoles can't handle it and the casual console kids can handle it even less. It's been like this for a long time. You never saw it because your mom never let you use the internet.

[Anonymous No.3968716]

PC gamers went from being regular nerds to being arrogant nerds overnight when Voodoo came out in '95. Come to think of it that may have played some supporting role in the nerd revolution.

[Anonymous No.3968717]

>>3968649
But the PC really is better if you're not running it on a toaster. Does that mean you should be an asshole about it? No.

Console games had some nice things going for it like split-screen and system-link but those are gone AFAIK. The only thing they have going for them are some exclusives and the fact most people wouldn't buy a second computer just to hook it up in their living room for gaming.

It's impossible for the PC to be worse than consoles.

>>3968714
>pc could only play 2,5d games like doom and so

But that's wrong.

[Anonymous No.3968720]

>>3968717
>But that's wrong.
well, then name a pc game from 1996 that could play at 3d, because I honestly can't

[Anonymous No.3968725]

>>3968697
>PCFX ads in EGM
PC-FX console?
>FX card
PC-FXGA?
Or I'm thinking about something different?

[Anonymous No.3968730]

>>3968649
Back then it was hard for PC gamers to truly lord around their superiority due to the fact that PC gaming was so much more ridiculously expensive than it is now.

I mean, of course they made fun of console games to some extent for having a lesser experience, but it would always been in a rather somber way since they knew they had to spend a fortune to do it.

These days you can build a PC better than a console for a price not much higher, so the so called "master race" is more audacious.

>>3968691
>seriously, the original Xbox, being the "most powerful" console of its generation, had a pathetic 64mb of RAM
You don't know shit. 64 MB was plenty for 2001 given that the Xbox didn't need to run a multitasking operating system nor needed to draw an image larger than 640x480.

The fact that it was dual-channel DDR meant it was a lot faster than what most PCs were using.

[Anonymous No.3968736]

>>3968725
Those PC graphics card ads they had in EGM. Forgot the name.

[Anonymous No.3968738]

>>3968720

Um Quake?

[Anonymous No.3968739]

>>3968720
MechWarrior 2

[Anonymous No.3968745]

>>3968730
>64 MB was plenty for 2001
Not really my PC at the time had 512mb. You could clearly tell how bad the RAM restriction was in games like Invisible War.

[Anonymous No.3968746]

>>3968725
>>3968736
3D FX ads

[Anonymous No.3968757]

>>3968745
>Not really my PC at the time had 512mb
Quantity of RAM was and is completely overrated. I remember there was a period when GPU manufactures would take advantage of computer illiteracy by selling really shitty cards with four times the normal amount of VRAM and market it as a decent gaming card.

And tech-illiterates actually bought it cause WOAH my GeForce 4 MX has 256 MB of RAM!

The fact is that speed of RAM is (usually) more important than quantity. I guarantee you that in 2001 having more than 256 MB was completely unnecessary for gaming, even if you were running anti-viruses, Microsoft Word, and Internet Explorer in the background of Windows XP and booted up something like Giants Citizen Kabuto.

>You could clearly tell how bad the RAM restriction was in games like Invisible War.
Invisible War was poorly coded trash, and so was the PC port which required graphic cards 5 times stronger than the one in the original Xbox to run decently.

Also it came out in 2003. So your complaint might be more along the lines of "why is console hardware static to the period of release?"

[Anonymous No.3968759]

>>3968649
One of my friends had a PC and he wasn't like that. He also had Nintendo consoles too. He liked both. Different systems, different games.

>>3968720
Does Flight Simulator count?

[Anonymous No.3968841]

>I can't remember PC gaming really being a thing, since I always had home consoles just like my friends.
In my experience everybody had a computer and only a handful had a console or two.

[Anonymous No.3968990]

Voodoo and some other 90's companies made hating consoles more mainstream, but I remember reading 80's articles shitting on consoles as well in favor of Commodore. The PCMR thing seems like a reaction to all the PC gaming is dead clickbait articles 7th gen. Journalists really thought the PS3 and Xbox 360 would wipe out PC, which wasnt helped by Sony marketing the PS3 as a supercomputer to replace PCs. Then 7th gen lasted forever while GPUs got stronger which made the differences more obvious, and then the PS4 and Xbox One came out underpowered which gave people a lot more ammo.

[Anonymous No.3968996]

>>3968720
>well, then name a pc game from 1996 that could play at 3d, because I honestly can't

Quake, Descent, Need for Speed, shitload of other racing games I can't be arsed to look up/list

every goddamn flight simulator

Elite ran in 3d, on a Commodore 64 in 1985.

[Anonymous No.3969029]

>>3968720

[Anonymous No.3969032]

>>3968649
The master race thing come from The Witcher 1 review from ZeroPunctuation who was making fun of PCgamers because they would like a such game only because it's an exclusive.
PC gamers then proceed to use that term to piss him off. (shitposting about PCgaming in 2007 was huge, the Xbox 360 was THE hotshit).

[Anonymous No.3969036]

Nothing has changed since the Usenet days. Nothing.

[Anonymous No.3969038]

[Anonymous No.3969039]

[Anonymous No.3969041]

>>3968720

[Anonymous No.3969042]

[Anonymous No.3969045]

[Anonymous No.3969047]

[Anonymous No.3969048]

[Anonymous No.3969049]

[Anonymous No.3969050]

[Anonymous No.3969052]

[Anonymous No.3969057]

[Anonymous No.3969058]

[Anonymous No.3969087]

>>3968757
>Also it came out in 2003
64MB was an extremely "meh" amount of RAM in 2003, definitely not fit for a gaming PC.

[Anonymous No.3969102]

PC goys were pretty much always giant fags with terrible games, more money than sense too.

[Anonymous No.3969105]

>>3969057
>evidence of carat nose in 1992

[Anonymous No.3969229]

>>3969087
Did you read my posts or are you just mindlessly repeating the same statement?

[Anonymous No.3969252]

>>3968649
No. People that say this ideology of superiority existed before 2007 are completely wrong. There were cases of a person here and there saying PC gaming was better, but not that it made others "plebeians" and such.

There were plenty of times pre Xbox360 and ps3 that the general computer a person owned was far weaker than even the weakest console. Even to this day we have people with i5's and low-mid tier GPU's (look to steams reports of the most used hardware and resolutions) and resolutions of under 1080p.

It started around 2011 or 2012 when pc building hit literal rock bottom of intelligence around Windows 8 release. When steam finally made it fool proof to hit install and have a game work right away. If you asked someone in 2008 if they played the new CoD or some shit, then said you bought it on 360, no one would look the other way at your choice.

I have consistently had high end pc hardware since 2004 with my Radeon x8 series purchase. PC superiority didn't exist before the lowest of intelligence were capable of it.

[Anonymous No.3969332]

>>3969252
Wasn't the 360 more powerful than high end cards at launch on 2005?

[Anonymous No.3969347]

>>3969332
Sort of. Mostly due to it having a unified shader model while the PC cards did not yet have that.

[Anonymous No.3969359]

>>3968649
There have always been outspoken assholes if that's what you're asking. I've read old usenet posts from IBM PC enthusiasts who considered the NES to be kiddy shit and "not true games" ect.

>>3969058
I love this post. It really nails why there's no "retro" era of video games, it changes over time and people back then people thought their current (late '80s early '90s) crop of games was terrible compared to the Atari 2600 and '70s-early '80s arcade gameplay they grew up on.

[Anonymous No.3969364]

>>3969347
I heard somewhere that the developers of Turok were originally making it for PC, but found contemporary hardware to be underpowered, causing them to develop for the N64 instead. Is this true or it's just a rumor?

[Anonymous No.3969382]

[Anonymous No.3969384]

>>3969364
Has to be a rumor, Turok had that claustrophobic fog covering anything more than a few meters away since the N64 couldn't render it all (compare that to Unreal's environments for instance).

[Anonymous No.3969385]

>>3969364
Turok came out for Windows a few months after the N64 version.

[Anonymous No.3969387]

[Anonymous No.3969390]

>>3969387
>Galaxy Express 999
mah nigga

[Anonymous No.3969393]

>>3969385
As a port. But it was developed for N64. If Turok was developed natively for the PC there would be a lot of differences from the game we got

[Anonymous No.3969395]

>>3968649
As far as I'm aware, PCs were far behind consoles until the middle of the 5th generation, but consoles kept surpassing their contemporary PCs pretty much until the 360. Of course, the 7th gen lasted nearly an entire decade and now consoles are behind PC but it wasn't always this way.

[Anonymous No.3969417]

I feel like in the past the 3d consoles at launch time were on par with or more powerful than a reasonably priced PC

PS4/X1 was the first generation to clearly be wayyyyy behind what modern PCs could do, and that has really driven the fervor the last couple years

[Anonymous No.3969430]

>>3969395
It depended on the genre. CPU intensive games or games with complex contents tended to work better on computers. Strategy games are a prime example.

[Anonymous No.3969457]

>>3969417
And that reasonable price went lower over the years. In the beginning you had to pay $3-4k; now you are fine with less than $500. Meanwhile consoles went from $200 to $500.
You don't even have to take cheap/free games into account.

[Anonymous No.3969483]

[Anonymous No.3969507]

PC players probably wouldn't even be hostile to consoles if there weren't constant articles about "Will X console kill PC?" Ever since the launch of the NES there's been people saying computer gaming is dead, despite the fact that the entire console market literally collapsed which never really happened to computers. It doesn't help that PC has no major company to "defend" it, except Valve who's completely passive. You have Sony saying PC is obsolete with every new console launch, and Microsoft basically abandoned PC gaming near the end of the og Xbox and start of the 360 era. It's a miracle people buy gaming PC's at all still considering how much hostility the platform has received from journalists and major corporations.

[Anonymous No.3969519]

>>3969507
>It doesn't help that PC has no major company to "defend" it, except Valve
The closest PC had to that was Microsoft and they were the one who killed Age of Empire and Flight Simulator, series that sold copies like hotcake. People still buy those games after a decade.

[Anonymous No.3969520]

>>3968720
Holy fuck leave this board retard.

[Anonymous No.3969559]

>>3968649
Nah. Most people enjoyed games on both PC and consoles.

[Anonymous No.3969573]

>>3969507
I always thought that consoles are for casuals and PC for the best performance results (that doesnt seem to be the case for retro games). I am a rather poor person so I decided to stick with computers, since I could work and play. I've never played XBOX and Gamecube when they were hot due to financial issues (the fact that I am brazilian doesnt help either, consoles are expensive) and PS2 was the last console I've touched, but didnt enjoyed as much as PS1 (I used to think the that sony screen that pops when you turn it on was the state-of-art in graphics !)

>>3969519
I thought it was the opposite.

[Anonymous No.3969578]

PC gaming was shit in the 80s, it was a bunch of Sharedata CGA games I had on my 286. Things didn't get decent until the 386 and vga came out, but there was still a horrible design flaw where the graphics chip had to travel to fucking Egypt and back to display anything. They fixed that with the VESA bus, and PC gaming became great. But in the 80s, consoles or Amiga/Atari ST were the way to go for games.

[Anonymous No.3969608]

>>3968649
Consoles r better
>i put the game in the slot and it just werks

[Anonymous No.3969615]

>>3968720
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Carpet_(video_game)

1994.
full 3d movement and world with land deformation (you could use spells to build volcanoes, build castles, etc)

[Anonymous No.3969887]

>>3969483
>gives realistic estimates of both platforms
>does note where the PS2 should excel, but is mindful of theoretical VS. real-world performance
>does acknowledge price-vs-performance differences

It's a little snarky and obviously written in the PC's favor but that's surprisingly even-handed

[Anonymous No.3970145]

Through most of the 16 bit generation, for many genres, gaming on a console was superior to an x86 PC. Bitmapped graphics were inferior to tile and sprite based at least until VLB came around,

[Anonymous No.3970161]

They were quite the elitist back then, too. Somewhere around the turn of the millennium, people started using the term 'video games' to include both computer and console games, which only fueled the elitism further. At least back in retro days, video games exclusively meant console games, and computer games were called, well, computer games. Come to think of it, the term "jrpg" and "wrpg" were introduced around the same time and I wouldn't be surprised if it were the exact same assholes who did both.
Those labels brought nothing but poss race horseshit.

[Anonymous No.3970165]

>>3968720
>Duke Nukem 3D
I was playing direct dial and LAN matches before you were born

[Anonymous No.3970231]

>>3969384
Are you stupid? Alpha blended fog wasn't trivial for PCs of 1997, unless they used the latest 3D accelerators.

Unreal stressed out hard even the newest hardware in 1998, so it's little surprise the Turok devs didn't want to limit their market.

[Anonymous No.3970235]

>>3970145
>VLB
What's VLB?

[Anonymous No.3970241]

>>3969573

[Anonymous No.3970260]

>>3968649
you saved yourself some trouble. elitist were off the fucking hook. everyone was as 1337 as you can get. now it's all a fucking joke because people miss the actual joke. casuals ruined what was once a genuine sub culture into a fucking garbage pale.

[Anonymous No.3970321]

>>3970260
>those delicious ragey clan wars, TS raids and forum shitstorms
1337 days were truly something beautiful.

[Anonymous No.3970336]

>>3968649
>Were PC gamers edgelords back in the days like nowadays?
PC gaming hardware wise became a thing in the late 90's.

>Nowadays, PC gaming is seen as "superior" and PC gamers call themselves the "master race". I've never seen anything like this in the past.
PC gaming is superior mostly because of it's hardware/software is not locked down.

[Anonymous No.3970339]

>>3968697
>>3968736
You shouldn't be talking about such shit if you lack common knowledge like that

[Anonymous No.3970342]

>>3968720
Future Shock, 1994

[Anonymous No.3970353]

>>3969393
It still ran better on a PC

[Anonymous No.3970359]

>>3969887
When the PS2 came out, it was the last time a console came out that could compete hardware wise with a PC, after that consumer PCs have always had the edge over consoles.

[Anonymous No.3970373]

>>3970353
What PCs are we talking about here? Of course it runs better on a 2017 PC

[Anonymous No.3970382]

>>3970373
A PC with the hardware around 1-2 years after the launch of the N64.

[Anonymous No.3970390]

>>3968649
Kings Quest was cool.
Space Quest was pretty rad too.
KQ, got the 1st multi-color game out there from my understanding.

[Anonymous No.3970404]

>>3970382
I'd really hope so, considering the amount of money you'd spend on a PC vs console.

Though oddly, there still were some cards sold in 97/98 that performed worse than N64. Stuff that was sold by Trident, Number Nine, etc. Other cards like Nvidia's RIVA 128 ran quite faster than the N64 did, but also had worse image quality.

I think a lot of people in this thread don't quite realize how dire 3D was on PC until Voodoo came along, and that was just 1 or 2 cards out of 50 shitty ones.

[Anonymous No.3970405]

>>3970390
Apparently that was Color Gotcha.

[Anonymous No.3970449]

>>3969058
What a seminal post. It embodies everything that is to be human, applied the vidya world.

> today's games are shit
> only graphical and sound candy
> the gameplay is shitty and generic
> there's no innovation and variety
> there's only shooters nowadays
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (top kek)
>back then things were better

You could change a few keywords, and have your standard v post. It's also a llittle sad to realize how ethereal and cyclical nature of things. We are just passing through.

[Anonymous No.3970535]

>>3970404
>Though oddly, there still were some cards sold in 97/98 that performed worse than N64.
>Oddly people brought video cards for computers they didn't use for gayming
Sure is odd uh? Nowadays everybody just buys 1080's!

[Anonymous No.3970541]

>>3970449
Yup, it's exactly like that nowadays too.
Except there was still innovation back then, like actual 3D engines that would let you play games like you never had before. Nowadays it really is "everything is done already" and it's just another digit after the game name.

[Anonymous No.3970557]

>>3970404
You do know Voodoo came out almost at the same time as the N64 and Voodoo 2 less than 2 years (less than a year if you are in NA) after the N64 and that easily superseded the N64, not to mention you could have TWO of them in your computer working together.

[Anonymous No.3970572]

>>3970541
>Nowadays it really is "everything is done already"
Bullshit, we still need to figure out how to do realistic physics and ray casting.

[Anonymous No.3970582]

How can N64 even compete?
It's simple, it can't.

[Anonymous No.3970586]

>>3970572
But we have that already, just because it isn't realistic enough won't change the games enough to be a WOW factor like going from Doom to Quake was.

>ray casting
Wolfenstein 3D's ray casting was pretty realistic :^)

[Anonymous No.3970587]

>>3969050
>(til I got my modem, then I went cyberpunk)
>mfw I got my modem


>>3969052
wait.

[Anonymous No.3970593]

>>3970582
Indeed, the more you look at such things the more obvious it becomes that people like OP are just console lovers who can't accept PCs being better platforms, I'm not defending the 0.1% of "PC master race" faggots who sperg out and sadly are the loudest of us, but in terms of hardware/software PC will always be leading, specially nowadays. In terms of 3D graphics, there was a time (late 90's) where consoles could outperform consumer PCs but it was always that the same graphics hardware that powered the consoles became available to consumer PCs just months after the consoles release.

[Anonymous No.3970594]

>>3970586
It feel like we have made no real progress since Half life 2.

[Anonymous No.3970595]

>>3970557
The Voodoo was pretty much a derivative of the N64's GPU, which is why Glide wrappers have been a pretty successful avenue for N64 emulation.

[Anonymous No.3970598]

>>3970594
Pretty much.

[Anonymous No.3970604]

>>3970595
No, not really, the reason Glide wrappers are as successful in N64 emulation is just because the API is easy-to-use and alike to the N64's own graphics API, nothing to do with the GPU.

[Anonymous No.3970607]

>>3970604
>N64's own graphics API
Not really API, more like instuctions

[Anonymous No.3970610]

>>3970595
The GPU in the N64 was a derivative of SGI 3D workstation graphics chipsets.

[Anonymous No.3970612]

>>3970535
Yeah but the prices were often out of wack with their actual performance. There was a lot of "he he you got tricked!" element going on when buying early 3D accelerators.

>>3970557
No shit you could buy actual, proper 3D technology for PC if you knew where to look and where to get it. But that doesn't change the fact that vast majority of "gaming" PCs couldn't into hardware 3D even if they had an "accelerator" because the early 3D acceleration scene was a total mess.

Also because the technology was improving at such a rapid rate, last year's card was complete garbage for this year's games. As a final correction to your post the Voodoo didn't get working game drivers until at least 6 months after the N64 came out which was a loooong time for technology back then.

[Anonymous No.3970619]

>>3969252
Total BS. Really nerdy types preferred PC gaming always. There were PC software stores. Better simulators, rpgs, tons of CD-roms. There was a short time when consoles had superior games (Sonic!). But then you had Doom, Myst, Quake, etc. They had a warcraft clone in 3d called Myth. You could do gaming at 900x600 resolution. There is some 3d card that could play Sega Saturn games in higher resolution at a higher framerate. PCs were always higher rez than a regular TV and nerds loved their systems.

Steam created "PC master race" because cost of games went down. But dumb people are always upgrading to the latest graphics card, even if it costs more than a console.

[Anonymous No.3970637]

Tl;dr PCs always dominated.

[Anonymous No.3970642]

>>3968691
>RAM

[Anonymous No.3970670]

>>3968649
not really. pc gaming wasn't the meme it is now, "master race" etc. people just played and enjoyed everything, consoles and pc alike, at least that was my experience. we were affluent though so go figure. houses generally had at least one console from each gen as well as a home PC, which played everything you wanted it to. This was the mid '90s.

then around '97-'98 shit started getting fucked with games starting to require advanced dedicated graphics card. still remember the first time I tried borrowing my friend's Kingpin disc and having it not work at home because it needed a 3DFX card. also remember the slideshow framerates I got the first time I tried playing Blood 2 on my PC.

[Anonymous No.3970908]

>>3970619
>You could do gaming at 900x600 resolution.
Bitch please, I was playing Quake 2 in '99 at 1920x1440

[Anonymous No.3970934]

>>3968649
i guess PC and consoles were more seen as two different things back then. With modern consoles getting nearer to pc performance and architecture this border gets smaller and comparisons and competition got more into focus. However it is safe to say that consoles had the better game library back then. Developing games for consoles was economically far more relevant than pc games.

[Anonymous No.3971032]

>>3968720
I was playing Castle Master on my Amstrad PC1512 in 1992 so eat that.

[Anonymous No.3971034]

>>3969045
>solved it

[Anonymous No.3971038]

>>3969057
>Serria

[Anonymous No.3971040]

>>3970908
Oh yea? You sure about that?

[Anonymous No.3971070]

>>3970619
>muh fps games
back to your containment general

[Anonymous No.3971110]

>>3968649
The whole PCMR thing is nothing but a bunch of retards, some with a superiority complex and others that ironically use it to trigger any Console User that fails for it.

The PC though, IS the superior option objectively.
Consoles only have Exclusives, that's literally it.

[Anonymous No.3971172]

>>3970934
>Developing games for consoles was economically far more relevant than pc games.
Do you have any facts to back that up? Releasing for PC was cheap since you didn't have licenses or expensive cartridges, shareware and the like made distribution even easier. You saw a lot of simultaneous releases or computer games getting adopted to consoles with mixed success.
Small and medium development teams were found mostly on computers.
And don't forget that economics is not a factor for quality.

[Anonymous No.3971179]

>>3970619
When it comes to the software PCs were master race long before "PC" gaming became a thing. Basically as soon as floppys became the standard distribution media. Things like the Apple 2 and C64 had more games than the NES would ever have by the time the NES was launched. They weren't always the best version but the sheer volume variety and ease of copying made them master race.

>>3970670
You've led a sheltered, and short, life. Console wars have always been a thing and are nothing compared to the PC platform wars from before you were born.

>>3971040
I think he's sure he was still a poorfag 4:3 pleb in 99.

[Anonymous No.3971207]

Reading this thread is sad. Bunch of obvious underage, bait, and europoor. >>3969032 The only true statement ITT that I see.

PC gamer culture is a bunch of normalfags. Has been since the late 2000s. The 90s to early 2000s were vastly better than it is now in terms of the community. I got serious into being a PC enthusiast in about 93/94 as a kid so it was perfect timing into the surge of online multiplayer games of the later 90s. The amount of shit talking when voip became a thing was amazing and rarely did people get butthurt. It was a different time and a better group of people. Mainly Americans were all that were online and especially white Americans. It was a rarity to see someone from Europe.

PC gamers were edglords by gen y/underage millennials standards of today. By internet standards they were your typical weeabs and nerds. I met a lot of clanmates/guildmates from DnD circles. That doesn't happen anymore. DnD is too nerdy to be cool even ironically so it escapes most the cancer.
>>3971172
Literately $$$ dumbass.

[Anonymous No.3971335]

>>3971207
>Literately $$$ dumbass.
Explain further.

[Anonymous No.3971430]

>>3971335
What is there to explain? If you lack a basic level of comprehension in video game sale perhaps don't make a comment. A simple google search of game sales is there at your fingertips. If you have the mental capacity to come to a conclusion about the data is a different story.

[Anonymous No.3971435]

>>3968649

No because back them there wasn't any idiots making unironically memes their identity.

[Anonymous No.3971439]

>>3971430
Game sales don't correlate to the amount of games that were released nor quality.
It's obvious that not developing for consoles was a sound business decision.

[Anonymous No.3971463]

>>3971207
>Bunch of obvious underage
And you just increased that

[Anonymous No.3971464]

>>3971439
>Game sales don't correlate to the amount of games
So we've established you're a retard. I'm not sure how much farther to go with a mental invalid like yourself.

[Anonymous No.3971474]

>>3971179
>You've led a sheltered, and short, life
I'm 30 years old but alright.

>Console wars have always been a thing and are nothing compared to the PC platform wars from before you were born.
I'm glad my life hasn't been as uneventful as yours has.

[Anonymous No.3971486]

>>3971464
If you look at best selling games of the late 90s you will see the N64 dominate.
Does that mean the N64 has more games than its competition or was more attractive to develop for?

[Anonymous No.3971494]

>>3971486
>Does that mean the N64 has more games than its competition or was more attractive to develop for?
Well gee retard Mcgee lets see. If your goal is to sell the most games possible in a theoretical situation. Should we sell on the platform that demonstrated the most sold games or the one that didn't? Hmmm. This is a tuffy.

[Anonymous No.3971495]

PC gamers have been like that since at least c.2000. Before that it wasn't really that big a deal as everything wasn't that powerful.

The wholePC master race thing has kicked off big in the last 10 years, mainly due to core gamers going to PC and more normalfags going to consoles (Though of course there was always normalfags playing consoles, and of course hardcore gamers were themselves normalfags at one point).

But yeah, for ~20 years now it's been a thing, and it's pointless and anyone who hits out with this shti is just disregard this crap. There are good games to be had on every platform.

[Anonymous No.3971502]

>>3971495
Wtf is a core gamer? Rest of your post is nonsense.

[Anonymous No.3971506]

>>3971494
Your goal isn't necessarily to sell the most games.
Your goal is to make a reasonable profit. Developing for consoles is costly and comes at a higher risk, developing for PCs is a safer bet. If you're successful you can still port to consoles and grab extra cash there.

[Anonymous No.3971510]

>>3971506
>Developing for consoles is costly and comes at a higher risk
You seem to think that PC games are made for free or something and there is a gamble with console game devs. Again idiot. See the sales. Console sales blewout PC game sales. So did Arcade sales which are most expensive than either to develop and manufacturer.

PC games just don't sell as well.

[Anonymous No.3971527]

>>3971510
The question isn't how much sold but whether they were made.
You can't pretend that consoles got more games against all other evidence.
You could make a PC game with less budget than was realistic for a console release, right down to games developed by a single guy in his backyard.

[Anonymous No.3971537]

>>3971527
Alright retard. If what you want to count is the total number of games and include the fuckload of flash games and freeware titles on PC then yes. There are more PC game titles then anything else.

That wasn't mine or the other anon's point you special autistic little child.

[Anonymous No.3971549]

>>3971537
Flash should be counted as its own platform.
>That wasn't mine or the other anon's point you special autistic little child.
Was your point hat consoles are better because their games sold more?

[Anonymous No.3971565]

>>3969615
That game was fun. But it was
on Saturn too

[Anonymous No.3971570]

>>3971549
What do you want me to say? You're incapable of understanding> You have poor comprehension skills? Reply if you want but I'm out. You're on the spectrum.

[Anonymous No.3971572]

>>3971570
If you have no arguments I suggest you delete your posts.

[Anonymous No.3971629]

>>3969252
People just enjoyed consoles and PC gaming as it came. PCs were so expensive most people didn't have access to them and it became a treat to play something new and interesting.

Then again the Amiga and Commodore 64 were standard in a lot of the EU so we didn't have console shit fights like the yanks seem to.

[Anonymous No.3971648]

90s was the height of hacker culture, you think 'master race' is bad you have no idea

[Anonymous No.3971670]

>>3971179
>but the sheer volume variety and ease of copying made them master race
what is smooth scrolling?

[Anonymous No.3971719]

>>3969252
>It started around 2011 or 2012 when pc building hit literal rock bottom of intelligence around Windows 8 release. When steam finally made it fool proof to hit install and have a game work right away. If you asked someone in 2008 if they played the new CoD or some shit, then said you bought it on 360, no one would look the other way at your choice.


>Only intelligent people have the time and ability to make games install.

It's funny because the elitist PC culture has always been a lot about elitist intelligence, claiming that people on consoles must just not be able to handle the PC. You're one of them.

[Anonymous No.3971731]

>>3968674
Considering the Master Race thing was made by Yahtzee who is snarky as fuck it was never meant to be taken seriously

[Anonymous No.3971906]

>>3970235
VESA Local Bus. The ISA bus on PC's was shit for graphics so VLB was used for 3d accelerator cards, then PCI replaced both slots and AGP would be used for graphics cards.

[Anonymous No.3971915]

>>3971731
/v/ used the term before Yahtzee did.

[Anonymous No.3971920]

>>3971629
Commodore fanboys are easily the most toxic computer fanbase though, trash-talking consoles, PC's and Japanese computers all at the same time.

[Anonymous No.3971932]

>>3971920
>toxic

Okay Tumblr. Go back to playing LoL, we're discussing retro stuff here not just Mario 64

[Anonymous No.3971935]

>>3971915
no

[Anonymous No.3971969]

It was kind of a thing during 5th and 6th gen too, to a very lesser extent, but those guys always came out as overcompensating to me.

[Anonymous No.3971974]

>>3971935
Yeah they did bro, Yahtzee referenced the meme not the other way around.

[Anonymous No.3971989]

>>3971974
>Yeah they did bro
No they didn't, bro
(its funny because my argument also has no substance)

[Anonymous No.3971997]

>>3971974
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/the-glorious-pc-gaming-master-race

[Anonymous No.3972221]

>>3968691
I dunno, I remember as a few years of distinct "PlayStation envy" among PC gamers in the 1990s.

[Anonymous No.3972252]

>>3968745
What were you doing with half a gig of RAM in 2001?

[Anonymous No.3972256]

>>3971648
>90s was the height of hacker culture
The citation for that is what, the cringy eponymous movie with Anjoliena from 1995?

[Anonymous No.3972258]

>>3972252
According to your own figure it would put him halfway between "very decent" and "excellent" in 2001.

[Anonymous No.3972265]

>>3971486
Huh? I thought that the consensus is that the N64 was a failure and that Nintendo was owned hard by Sony ever since the PS1.

[Anonymous No.3972324]

>>3970908
Ok, now tell us what was the CPU, graphics card(s), monitor, and (most importantly) the framerate.

[Anonymous No.3972329]

>>3971474
Some parents can't handle the stress of raising a child who interacts with others and tells them their toys suck.

>>3971670
>what is smooth scrolling?
Something the C64 did exceptionally well due to it being a feature built into the chipset?

[Anonymous No.3972338]

>>3969483
>PS2 has only 4MB of video memory

Then how the heck did games such as Silent Hill 2 even work? Try running Silen Hill 2 for PC with a 4MB graphics card, good luck.

[Anonymous No.3972349]

>>3969395
Remember that the PC architecture is a descendant of the orignal IBM PC, which was a machine designed for work (number crunching, word processing, databases, you name it) rather than entertainment. It had more raw processing power than any contemporary home computers such as Atari, Commodore or Amiga machines as well as consoles from Nintendo or Sega, but that raw CPU power was-ill suited for effective graphics and sound processing (as compared to the machines which had plenty of dedicated chips giving them capabilities suited for games) well into the 90s. It was only around the time Doom came out when the PC ecosystem finally proved itself to be a capable gaming platform which could attempt to go head to head with contemporary consoles.

[Anonymous No.3972356]

>>3968720

[Anonymous No.3972367]

>>3972252
>32gb of ram
>decent
>2016
What the fuck is this based on? 32gb is still quite the fuck load too much even now

[Anonymous No.3972371]

>>3969384
Fog was a nifty cop-out to make up for rendering deficiencies - I guess the orignal Silent Hill for PS1 is the best example. Similarly, Dune was the perfect setting for an early RTS game - you could keep the maps very barren and emptish to offload the machine, while keeping it plausible ("hey, it's a desert planet, isn't it"). Not to mention, Mario got a moustache and overalls so that his nose and arms would be well visible with the limited amount of pixels and colors. Lots of games ended up as they did on the base of some technical limitations.

[Anonymous No.3972375]

>>3972258
Instead of "excellent" it should rather be more like "probably way overkill for almost anyone".

[Anonymous No.3972382]

>>3968649
What are you referring when you say "PC gaming"? Computer games in general: C64, Amiga, Atari ST, PC-88 and 98, X6800? Or IBM PC only?

[Anonymous No.3972383]

>>3972382
Everyone mostly just refers to IBM PC or compatible

[Anonymous No.3972384]

>>3968717
Compare a 1983 PC to a famicom and you will see how poorly it performed against the Japanese machine

[Anonymous No.3972395]

>>3970587
Yea, it was easy to "go cyberpunk with a modem" if mommy was paying all the phone bills. Most of the 90s "cybepunks" were just spoiled kids who got their computers, assorted computer gear and phone bills for internet surfing sponsored by their parents. Acting all tuff'n'edgy while all the time staying within a comfy safe space guaranteed by mommy and daddy.

[Anonymous No.3972396]

>>3972384
>1983 pc
Because PCs in 1983 were for work, if you wanted games, you'd be better off with a C64

[Anonymous No.3972404]

>>3972252

this graph is inaccurate... general purpose is one thing, sun workstation is another

general purpose computers over the years typically did not have the Capacity to be expanded beyond "decent" levels of Ram according to this graph

1990 most computers manufactured would only have 1-3mb and anything budget would only have conventional (640kb, or even 512kb). I say 3mb because they'd have 1mb built in plus a 2mb stick.

1994 no friggin way was you having 32mb in your system - Doom II was the biggest game resource hog there was and even it was only designed for "4mb, 8mb recommended". Anything above 8mb and you had some kind of $4000 server or workstation bullshit.

Starting around 2006 ish these figures start becoming I suppose realistic.

But whoever made this graph was just extrapolating into the past based on some trend they was looking at, and didnt take any time or have the life experience to know.

[Anonymous No.3972407]

>>3972367
>What the fuck is this based on?

Any non-halfwit should clearly see that the chart has powers of 2 progress linearly by one every two years, as well as across categories from "barely enough" to "excellent". Whether it holds or not (and for whom) is a different story, but somehow it fits surprisingly well, at least for the 1995-2015 period. Why memory expansion progress has slowed a bit for most people in most recent years can have many reasons, such as 8-16 GB being still more than enough for most tasks, memory prices going up, or others.

[Anonymous No.3972408]

>>3972383
Ah, well the best computer games (or their superior ports at least) in the 80's to very early 90's were not on the IBM PC. Also, if my oldfag memory serves me right, it wasn't nearly as popular as it is today.
Desktops are becoming specialized beasts as most "normal" people moved their computer need to mobile devices

[Anonymous No.3972412]

>>3972404
>this graph is inaccurate
See >>3972407, specifically
>the chart has powers of 2 progress linearly by one every two years, as well as across categories from "barely enough" to "excellent". Whether it holds or not (and for whom) is a different story, but somehow it fits surprisingly well, at least for the 1995-2015 period

[Anonymous No.3972413]

>>3972396
That was my point actually. PC (as in IBM PC) gaming wasn't a thing

[Anonymous No.3972421]

>>3972404
>Starting around 2006 ish these figures start becoming I suppose realistic.

Nah, 64 MB in 1998, 128 MB in 2000, 256 MB in 2002 or 512 MB in 2004 looks fine to me as "decent, but nothing special or extraordinary". Don't see why you have a problem with that. And if you ran Windows 95 in 1995 with only 8 MB of RAM (or 16 at best) well, tough luck I guess.

[Anonymous No.3972423]

>>3968720

point of fact N64's 3d graphics looked like cat piss, they didnt do textures well - almost minecraft level, and were catered for cartoony graphics that often only had gradient shading.

it was immature for its time but it got by on the silly graphics associated with mario and zelda

it would have been much more suited to making detailed feature rich 2d sprite games such as Symphony Of The Night

> they could have made SoTN on the N64 without a problem, with a tiny hit to graphic presentation, and using patched together audio for the music the same way silent hill 1 did.

[Anonymous No.3972435]

>>3972404

>>3972076 says:
>Early to mid 90s:
>32~ MB of RAM. Windows 95 is popular.

Don't cry that everyone had just 4MB of memory in 1995 based on just yourself.

[Anonymous No.3972436]

>>3972421
I ran Windows 95 OSR 2 and even Microsoft Office 97 just fine on a 486 with 8 MB of RAM. I was honestly surprised at how well it worked.

[Anonymous No.3972450]

>>3972423
>it would have been much more suited to making detailed feature rich 2d sprite games such as Symphony Of The Night

Probably, but hey, marketing proclaimed 2D games as outdated and uninteresting by the mid 90s, so what could you do but jump on the 3D bandwagon? The magic phrases "3D" and "CD" mattered in the latter half of the 90s more than anything else.

[Anonymous No.3972462]

>>3969387
I'd be for an /ar/ board, but I am not sure where to draw the line for "retro" animes.

[Anonymous No.3972469]

>>3972436
I don't say it wouldn't run, but the memory was probably just enough and 8 MB was really vastly sub-par by 1996. Similarly, you could run XP SP2 and Office 2003 with only 128 MB in 2004 - it would probably work well, but really just barely so (try opening huge documents or run other stuff in the background and you'll notice it right away).

[Anonymous No.3972487]

>>3972450

> jump on the mini-CD craze, get 150mb storage instead of 32mb with carts

> ooh its a MINI cd, those are so much higher tek and awesome looking than normal cds

could have been a great marketing gimmick, and at the same time included some FMV or at least more textures in their games

instead they didnt do this until the gamecube

>>3972469
>>3972436
my point is that the middle point of the graph is pretty much the MAXIMUM for the 90s on up through at least 2000

[Anonymous No.3972505]

>>3972487

[Anonymous No.3972537]

>>3972487
>my point is that the middle point of the graph is pretty much the MAXIMUM for the 90s on up through at least 2000

Oh come on, 32 MB SIMM modules existed in 1994 (expensive as hell, but still), but you say that 16 MB was the "MAXIMUM" of total memory available?

A Dell Optiplex GXa from 1998 (being 1997 tech really) can accept 384 MB of RAM, and that only because Dell cheaped out and had the mobo designed with only 3 memory slots (the 440LX "Balboa" chipset supports up to 512 MB).

[Anonymous No.3972614]

>>3972413
But by the late 80s and early 90s, PC Gaming did become quite the thing

[Anonymous No.3972668]

>Were PC gamers edgelords back in the days
If you're talking about going waaay back, imo PCs didn't really overtake consoles graphically until Doom in 1993

[Anonymous No.3972767]

>>3972349
>PC/AT: 80286 6mhz
>Amiga: 68000 7mhz
>80206: 1.28 MIPS at 12 MHz
>68000: 1.4 MIPS at 8 MHz, 2.188 MIPS at 12.5 MHz
>more raw processing power than Amiga
You must have got beat real hard with the stupid stick. I don't even to go into the massive power of the copper and blitter to illustrate how unbelievably retarded you are.

[Anonymous No.3972859]

>>3972767
Why do you compare a 80286 CPU from 1982 with a 68000 CPU that an Amiga 500 from 1987 had? How about comparing it to a 20 Mhz 80386 from 1987? Regarding the copper and blitter, this is dedicated graphics hardware which the 1980s PCs lacked entirely.

[Anonymous No.3972915]

>>3972767
>compares the early 80s AT with a late 80s Amiga

Nice cherrypicking. Why not compare an 8088 PC from 1981 with an 68060 Amiga 4000? Lol

[Anonymous No.3972947]

>>3968691
>limitation doesn't breed creativity

[Anonymous No.3972969]

>>3968686
This, but there were fewer people playing games in general, and even fewer online. Not everyone was a dick, and like others have said already a lot of PC gamers also had consoles and loved them.

LAN parties were the shit back in the day (once everything was working). Honestly, present day is the best time to play games ever, shitload of multiplats, online communities that aren't a nightmare to use, not having to install things off twenty floppies, and - most importantly -
emulation that doesn't require countless late nights spent troubleshooting.

[Anonymous No.3972975]

>>3972969
>install new game
>call someone a nigger
>get permanently banned from playing the game
>Honestly, present day is the best time to play games ever,

[Anonymous No.3972995]

>>3968649

It was always this way, but PC gamers simply don't have friends, so their way of life doesn't spread.

[Anonymous No.3973014]

>>3972859
>>3972915
The original Amiga from 85 had the same CPU and the AT was IBMs top model from 84.
If you want 87 hardware you also got VGA which Amiga didn't surpass until 92.
PS/2 > Amiga > AT

[Anonymous No.3973058]

>>3972859
>>3972915
IBM 5170: August 1983
Amiga 1000: 11 months later
If you weren't so fucking underage you'd know this. If you weren't so fucking retarded you would have looked it up before making asses of yourselves.

80268: 1982
68000: 1979
The three year older 68000 has nearly twice the processing power of the 80286. Damn. You're making this so easy, I'm actually getting worse.

[Anonymous No.3973073]

There was a bit of smugness coming from home computers getting the "intellectual" genres like text adventures and RPGs, whereas console games were more about reflexes.

[Anonymous No.3973075]

>>3972975
Do you have tourettes or some shit? Just don't be a prick.

[Anonymous No.3973089]

>>3972338
OK, I did.

[Anonymous No.3974340]

>>3973014
PS/2 was thousands of dollars and marketed as a workstation for businesses, no one used it for home gaming/entertainment, while the Amiga and Atari ST were perfect for home and amateur use.

[Anonymous No.3974350]

>>3969029
looks like dog shit, snes and genesis had better 3d capabilities

[Anonymous No.3974401]

>>3974350
in 1991?

[Anonymous No.3974627]

>>3968649
The 90s as a whole were about being an edgelord no matter who you were. Just look at the advertisements from that period (no matter if TV or print), TV shows, music videos, anything. Not that cringy-flamboyant 80s thing, but just "muh edge".

[Anonymous No.3974635]

>>3973089
What? You got SH2 to run on PC with only a 4MB graphics card?

[Anonymous No.3974648]

>>3973089
>http://gamesystemrequirements.com/game/silent-hill-2GPU: 32 MB 3D-Graphics Card

It would probably work on lowest settings with a 16MB card, and you _might_ get it to run with an 8MB one with some hacks and tweaks (but expecting choking and glitching), but I just don't see it would run in any way, shape or form with just a 4MB card.

[Anonymous No.3974679]

>>3974350

Hah, The Genesis actually got a lot of ports of those 3D games and they always ran like shit compared to the originals.

[Anonymous No.3974690]

>>3968649
Then you're not old enough, OP. PC Gaming had a pretty vibrant gaming culture that was centered around shareware, because it was free and plentiful. I would consider the early to late 90s as probably PC gaming's "golden era."

[Anonymous No.3974782]

>>3968649
Once Doom came out, everybody was trying to jump on the PC gaming bandwagon. The real edgelords were those who were unironically using Linux way back in the 90s instead of just DOS/Windows like everyone else.

[Anonymous No.3974810]

>>3973058
>IBM 5170: August 1983
>Amiga 1000: 11 months later

Wrong. The Amiga 1000 wasn't released in July 1984 as you imply. It's premiere was in late 1985 and it wasn't widely available until 1986.

>The three year older 68000 has nearly twice the processing power of the 80286

Maybe, but Commodore decided to stick with this CPU until the 90s, while IBM machines were being steadily upgraded with new CPUs Intel would release. Do you think that in, say, 1989 the Amiga 2000 was more powerful than a 386-based PC?

[Anonymous No.3974829]

>>3968649
> It runs YES! Linux

[Anonymous No.3974887]

>>3974648
>>3974635
>>3972338
There's a thing called system/main RAM, you can find it on the motherboard of virtually any PC. There's nothing stopping you from using the main RAM as VRAM (apart from the bad framerates you'll get due to how ill-suited PCs are for the task).

[Anonymous No.3975221]

2004
Every LAN party I went to in my area, theres always a great sense of community, someone with a DC++ server and loads of stuff, and some retards getting mad at each other on DC++ chat for no reason

[Anonymous No.3975225]

>>3975221
last 2 lan parties i went to weere pretty shit due to all kinds of connectvity issues, to the point that you had over 100 ping playing ON LOCAL SERVERS

[Anonymous No.3975259]

>>3975221
>mountain dew

Basically dilluted high fructose syrup with some flavor/color additives and caffeine. How is it even "good"?

[Anonymous No.3975263]

>>3974887
Sure, 4MB is enough for the framebuffer alone at low to even mid resolutions, but even with AGP, fetching most if not all textures from main memory is going to make it unplayable.

[Anonymous No.3975278]

>>3975259
its even worse than coca-cola for your teeth, and tastes way worse
also im not the owner of those mountain dews, its just one of the PCs that was there at LAN

[Anonymous No.3975279]

>>3971565
And it was incredibly shit and laggy on the Saturn. I played both versions and even on my dad's shitty Compaq, it ran like a dream.

[Anonymous No.3975283]

>>3971207
>D&D is too nerdy to be cool.
>He doesn't know.

[Anonymous No.3975286]

>>3973075
>"IT'S ABOUT RESPECT AND BEING NICE."

[Anonymous No.3975287]

>>3975278
>monitors mostly smallish LCD, still some CRTs around
>ugly "silver with some black" dominates

How do I know the picture is from 2006-2009?

[Anonymous No.3975319]

>>3974627
Yup. 90s were just THE decade for edgelords.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF_WKwbueG8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTFwQP86BRs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Xxv3zGEw4I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmHDhAohJlQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sM2sKk4DPM

[Anonymous No.3975334]

Check em

[Anonymous No.3975341]

>>3975283
He doesn't know what?

[Anonymous No.3975353]

>>3975319
>hating alternative
You should feel bad.

[Anonymous No.3975410]

>>3968720

NASCAR Racing by Papyrus

1994

[Anonymous No.3975638]

>>3974648
>system requirement
>reliable

[Anonymous No.3975654]

>>3972462
Anything that's not done with traditional cel animation is not /ar/

[Anonymous No.3975659]

>>3975263
How can was the PS2 even able to get away with all the Main RAM <--> VRAM transfer shenanigans without everything becoming a slideshow anyways?

[Anonymous No.3975661]

Anyone else remember first seeing a Dreamcast running on a VGA box and being amazed because it actually held up to PC graphics?

I really miss those days with my new voodoo cards and trying to get quake2 up to 200fps for no real reason other than my pc could do it.

[Anonymous No.3975714]

>>3975659
Maybe some other chip was doing the scene rendering, and the 4MB of VRAM were literally just for the framebuffer storing completed frames to be sent to the video output.

[Anonymous No.3975719]

>>3975353
Not hating at all, but you have to admit these videoclips all reek of the 90s typical "edgyness" (what was "alternative" anyways rather than "muh edgier pop/rock/techno") that you'll hardly find in another decade.

[Anonymous No.3975767]

>>3974810
I had a 1000 in August 1984. You don't remember because you weren't born yet.

>irrelevant false shit
>cherry picking
Top kek kid. Keep proving your ignorance.

Amiga 3000: 68030, 9 MIPS at 25 MHz
PC shit: 80386, 4.3 MIPS at 33 MHz
I'm winning so much I'm getting sick and tired of winning. Your /v/illage is missing it's idiot.

[Anonymous No.3975785]

>>3975767
>I had a 1000 in August 1984.
And you had a time machine as well, eh? Or your dad worked at Commodore so you could get your hands on one of the prototypes that existed in 1984?

>You don't remember because you weren't born yet.
Wrong.

Anyway, if the Amigas were so much powerful than PCs, then why were they much cheaper than PCs, and even despite that the PC prevailed and the Amiga died? Why did the Amigas have the reputation of a "cheap computer game platform" while PCs were considered the only viable machines to do real work on (apart from stuff which involved multimedia)?

Also, why the snarky and irrevent tone? Are you unable to lead a civilized conversation/argument? You're the one who's acting immaturely here, I'm afraid.

Btw, I'm not an Amiga hater by any means, I had myself one back in the 90s, and I know when and where its strengths lied. In the 80s it was way ahead of the PCs for any kind of multimedia tasks (audio, video, gaming etc.) thanks to its specialized chips which were integrated into the system by design, while the PCs mostly had monochrome displays and just a pathetic beeping speaker. Yet, as mentioned above, the PC was the workhorse of choice anyway despite its much higher price and small to nonexistent multimedia capabilities, and by the mid 90s it was all over - Commodore was bankrupt, and those who still had an Amiga at home and no PC were being laughed at at school by their peers who were playing Doom, Warcraft or Command & Conquer.

[Anonymous No.3975791]

>>3968649
No, but console faggots like you where pussyes even then.

[Anonymous No.3975792]

All those faggots hating on Amiga, when they have no clue about it.

[Anonymous No.3975803]

>>3975767
http://3dfmaps.com/CPU/cpu.htm
68030/33 is clearly beaten by 80386/25.

[Anonymous No.3975805]

>>3975792
Yea, the Amiga was so much superior, just no-one understood it and the evil conspiration of IBM, Intel, and Microsoft murdered it.

[Anonymous No.3975818]

>>3975792
Amiga, despite being an underdog going to battle with an architecture backed up by IBM and other corporations, got a huge advantage in the 80s, yet poor management decisions in the early 90s as well as a few other factors (one being that the Amiga had a strong market in Europe, but got hardly any grip in the US - it was classified as a "home computer", something which Americans would strongly distrust ever since the Atari game market fiasco from 1983) sealed its fate and spelled its untimely demise.

[Anonymous No.3975821]

>>3975767
>Amiga 3000: 68030, 9 MIPS at 25 MHz
>PC shit: 80386, 4.3 MIPS at 33 MHz

Sauce? Because the link given by >>3975803 seems to suggest otherwise.

[Anonymous No.3975825]

>>3975818
The problem with the Amiga is that people stuck with the A500. There was little Commodore could do to break that.

[Anonymous No.3975954]

>>3975785
>time machine
No I just happened to be a lot older than your dads sperm at the time kiddo. Keep pretending though. You totally convinced 0 people ITT.
>rabid rant
Top kek kid

>>3975821
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_per_second
Maybe not as credible as the saved from geocities bullshit faganon posted but a good place to start.

>>3975825
The problem with the Amiga is that underage think the A500 was the Amiga. I have one of the first 1000s. Got a 2000 after that and a toaster. Underage simply don't understand what we did with this shit at the time. Pic related is how many fucks I give.

[Anonymous No.3975983]

>>3968649
Reminder that platform loyalism is a mental illness.

[Anonymous No.3976003]

>>3975286
Pretty much, yeah, surely it's not too hard to understand why a company might want to set and enforce rules for behaviour in their own online community

[Anonymous No.3976153]

>>3970339
Calm down Sperg, I already answered it>>3968746

[Anonymous No.3976157]

>>3971207
You still a virgin, mate?

[Anonymous No.3976238]

>>3972412
>>3972407
I have no idea what you're trying to say. You didn't address the other posters' points at all.

[Anonymous No.3976250]

>>3975719
One of the many reasons the 90s was the last great decade.

[Anonymous No.3976263]

>>3975283
had some bros that used to play dnd a couple times a month back in hs. They are not what anyone would consider nerds or virgins. There is nothing wrong with having fun

[Anonymous No.3976767]

>>3975287
im 100% sure thats from 2003 or 2004
its funny, looking at these old pictures some of the people that spent an absurd amount of money on LCDs are counter-strike players, who would actually benefit more from using a CRT at high refresh rate than one of those laggy early LCDs at 60 Hz

[Anonymous No.3976790]

>>3976767
They also benefit from not having to lug those monsters around.

[Anonymous No.3976798]

>>3976790
sure, but CRTs weren't that massive
some of the small ones are probably jusst 10 kilograms or so
the heaviest ones with aperture grille probably up to 50 kilograms or so
and LCDs were a bit heavier back then

[Anonymous No.3976809]

>>3976798
I have a Dell 1905FP from 2004.
Some people liked having a 19" monitor instead of a 14" CRT.

[Anonymous No.3976828]

>>3971974
This. And it was used on /g/ before it was used on /v/. This was before the reddit invasion, which is why you probably didn't already know this.

[Anonymous No.3976829]

>>3972969
>online communities that aren't a nightmare to use

lol

[Anonymous No.3977559]

>>3975319
>my_childhood.mp3 (128 kbps j/stereo)

[Anonymous No.3977562]

>>3975319
>dissing Rammstein

I am speechless.

[Anonymous No.3977564]

>>3975654
Sounds like a pretty good criterion to me.
>Production I.G., known for their world-famous Ghost in the Shell film and other prestige features (Patlabor 2, Jin Roh) produced the first two digital anime series that most anime fans can recognize by name: Love Hina (with Xebec) and FLCL (with Gainax)
So, roughly pre-2000?

[Anonymous No.3977590]

>>3975319
One of my favorite edgetracks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9mJ82x_l-E

[Anonymous No.3977607]

>>3977562
Where was he dissing them? Just gave them as an example of an "edgy" music group rooted in the 90s (which is kinda hard to dispute).

(Anyway they've grown more and more cuck with the years and their albums after Mutter are all kinda meh, but w/e).

[Anonymous No.3977610]

>>3977607
>cuck
Oh great some underage kid giving his imput on songs that came out before he was born.

[Anonymous No.3977618]

>>3977607
Rammstein is a parody, they take that german edgy rightwing shit you mention, and turn it up to twelve. Not eleven, twelve.

[Anonymous No.3977641]

>>3975954
>The problem with the Amiga is that underage think the A500 was the Amiga.
It just so happens that >80% (or possibly even 90%) of Amigas ever sold were A500 machines. Nobody disputes that the Amiga scene was huge in its time (at least in Europe, as the Amiga, despite originally being an American product, never really took off in America), but the overwhelming majority of games and demos were targeted at an A500 with a megabyte of RAM.

Also, you keep arguing about processor performance, taking the CPUs out of context - both the A500 and the A2000 had a ~7 MHz 68000, so contemplating how much performance that CPU had at 12.5 or whatever other speed is irrelevant to the Amiga. You're also dodging to explain why you think things ended up as they did and why the Amiga market collapsed in the 90s, instead just hurling some butthurt taunts.

[Anonymous No.3977659]

Back in the day, the mags wouldn't shut the fuck up about how superior pc gaming was, when the ps2 came out this stopped as pc gaming was second tier at the time. Now the master thing is a joke really as the graphics on console are good enough for most people.

[Anonymous No.3977661]

>>3977610
>tfw the vocalist was literally cucked by his bandmate

Ironically enough, it's not even wrong to use the term literally. This however
>songs that came out before he was born.
is wrong, but whatever. Think whatever makes you happy.

>>3977618
They were never really right-wing-oriented, according to their own statements actually quite to the contrary. They have used certain imagery and pose to stir up controversy (similar to Laibach earlier), that's for sure.

[Anonymous No.3977673]

>>3975410
ridge racer on ps1 looks way better and nascar was a slideshow on typical pcs in 1994.

[Anonymous No.3977714]

>>3969483
gran turismo 3 looked way better than anything on pc at the time

[Anonymous No.3977780]

At the time of the videogame crash in the early 80's, computers like the C64 and Atari 8 bit were seen as a natural upgrade from embattled consoles like the 2600. Much better graphics and kids could sell their parents on the educational angle in an era of things like computer camps.

[Anonymous No.3977856]

>>3975805
That's pretty true

[Anonymous No.3977857]

>>3975818
Amiga didn't have any problems, Commodore did, marketing has nothing to do with how good the computer is

[Anonymous No.3977860]

>>3975803
>>3975821
Not him, but I don't need some flakey benchmarks, I own both, a A600 with ECS and a 33MHz '020 and a 40MHz 386 DX with SuperVGA, the Amiga gets 12 FPS in Doom and the 386 gets 8 FPS with the same settings.

[Anonymous No.3977864]

>>3974810
>Maybe, but Commodore decided to stick with this CPU until the 90s, while IBM machines were being steadily upgraded with new CPUs Intel would release.
You do know Amigas supported PPC chips too?

[Anonymous No.3977886]

>>3968720
Alone in the Dark 1 (and 2 I think). Came out before '95

[Anonymous No.3977941]

>>3977860
Obviously you can't run the exact same binary on both systems. The Amiga source port may be (and probably is) better optimized than the vanilla x86 build of Doom you most likely ran on the 386.

[Anonymous No.3977951]

>>3975825
The later Amigas weren't exactly very good at preserving backwards compatibility. There were some problems even after upgrading the kickstart on a A500 from 1.3 to 2.0, and if going to 3.1 you basically had to have switchable dual kickstarts if you wanted to keep reasonable 1.3 compatibility after an upgrade to 3.1. Also the AGA models introduced further issues with software designed for the OCS/ECS. I think this may have played a larger role in the inertia within the Amiga community that is usually acknowledged.

[Anonymous No.3978521]

>>3977941
Vanilla Doom is the most optimized Doom there is for early x86 instruction set, they released patched for it for years to come, it's refined as good as it can for the platform, nothing that could explain a 4 frame difference except the 68k just being a better CPU.

It was the goto CPU for workstations of the time, after that it was the PowerPC for years, it wasn't until the early 2000's that x86 came into workstations, for a reason.

[Anonymous No.3978524]

>>3977951
>Also the AGA models introduced further issues with software designed for the OCS/ECS.
Not really, AGA was usually never the problem, it was indeed ROM calls that broke compatibility but that mostly was fixed with software patches, latter things like WHDLoad that let older games have full compatibility with the new ROMs.

[Anonymous No.3978692]

Hey, what's the best pc i could've made back in 98, I want to see what the newest game i could run on it is so i can fuck with this board.

[Anonymous No.3978895]

>>3978692
A Pentium II Xeon with two Voodoo 2's in SLI and a Sound Blaster Live!

[Anonymous No.3979235]

>>3978692
Wait until next year for Pentium III, a 133MHz bus/memory and Voodoo 3.

[Anonymous No.3979364]

>>3979235
>Voodoo 3
depending on the game, V2 SLI can actually outperfrom a V3

[Anonymous No.3979508]

>>3978524
>>3978521

So what killed the Amiga ultimately? The fact that Amiga owners were reluctant to upgrade because of problems with AmigaDOS 1.3 compatibility on later models, and the average person needing a computer wanted MS-DOS compatibility?

[Anonymous No.3979548]

>>3979508
I'd say that IBM PCs became cheaper, more powerful, more usable, more standard and feature rich, not to mention by 1992 it had Wolfenstein 3D. By 1993, unless you were some poor ass britbong, a standard Amiga (As in not a video toaster) was pretty much seen as a toy and became more of a hobbyist thing to play with than an actual computer that could do more. Now these days, the only ones who really care about the Amiga (as in the newer models) are mostly just autistic british nerds and Eric Schwartz.

[Anonymous No.3979598]

>>3979548
>as in the newer models
You mean the AGA ones, or the AmigaOS 4.x ones? Aren't the latter a way to sell "Amiga"-branded 10+ year old hardware at exorbitant prices?

[Anonymous No.3980442]

>>3979508
Commodores shitty marketing did, we are talking about a time when you couldn't Google a product before buying.

>The fact that Amiga owners were reluctant to upgrade because of problems with AmigaDOS 1.3 compatibility on later models
No, the compatibility thing is overrated, you could just softload the 1.3 ROM if you needed it, there weren't really that many problems with compatibility that people make it seem.

>and the average person needing a computer wanted MS-DOS compatibility?
The average person just bought an Wintel machine because that's what everybody else was doing, because of the good marketing those machines got and had been viewed as office machines since the early 80's.

[Anonymous No.3980456]

>>3979548
>a standard Amiga (As in not a video toaster) was pretty much seen as a toy and became more of a hobbyist thing to play with than an actual computer that could do more.
By 1993? Not really, the big boxes where still rivaling even Macintoshes of the time in their stock specs and the budget machines where even capable machines with upgrades to the late 90's that took easily dumps on the first Pentiums.

>Now these days, the only ones who really care about the Amiga (as in the newer models) are mostly just autistic british nerds and Eric Schwartz.
Nobody gives a fuck about the "new" machines, >>3979598 is right.

>>3979598
AmigaOS 4 also runs on AGA machines.

[Anonymous No.3980458]

>>3968649
Worse than now.

[Anonymous No.3980463]

>>3980456
>where still rivaling even Macintoshes of the time
Where were Macs relevant aside from graphics and design?

[Anonymous No.3980501]

>>3980456
>still rivaling even Macintoshes

[Anonymous No.3980706]

>>3980463
>>3980501
Macintoshes of the time where the best _stock_ hardware you could get in the _consumer_ market

[Anonymous No.3980720]

>>3969052
>y can't Doomguy crawl
The precursor to Metroid?

[Anonymous No.3980730]

>>3968649
The only real consoles are nintendo, sony and ms are just very weak PCs you cant configure or build, nor use as a PC

[Anonymous No.3980960]

>>3980456
>even capable machines with upgrades to the late 90's that took easily dumps on the first Pentiums.
And yet, by that point there were no games coming out for the Amiga, aside from shitty ports of Windows and Dos games and a couple dumb clones

[Anonymous No.3980986]

>>3980960
Not entirely true, around '96 there where still solid games coming out for the system, most of them took advantage of hardware upgrades, but true, the biggest ones where probably just Quake and Doom source ports in the late 90's.

Not surprising though, no big publisher would release something for an officially dead system.

Some of the best software though came out at that time that really showed an upgraded machine in a new light, but this is /vr/ so nobody cares about that.

[Anonymous No.3980994]

>>3980960
>shitty ports
define "shitty ports" as most where more refined than their counterparts

>couple dumb clones
>stop making a 2D sidescroller!!! ree, you are copying Super Mario if you do that!!!1

[Anonymous No.3982567]

>>3980986
If the Amiga had such great potential, it's interesting why John Carmack never became interested in the platform. He and Romero were doing Apple ][ stuff in the 80s and then moved on to the PC, even though it was still ill-suited for games (Carmack somewhat famously had to implement a method for smooth scrolling himself, something which would be a complete non-issue on Amiga systems of the time). Was it due to Amiga effectively being an exotic niche system in the US?

[Anonymous No.3982579]

>>3969507
>the entire console market literally collapsed
No. The American console market did. Stop living in a bubble.

[Anonymous No.3982584]

>>3980994
Amiga ports of games such as Dune II or Syndicate were quite slow and limited compared to the PC versions if you ran them an 1 meg Amiga 500, and that's what most people remember them as. On newer Amigas with faster CPUs and more RAM the experience was likely better, but again not that many owned A600 or A1200 (let alone A4000) units as compared to those who stuck with the A500 well into the 90s.

[Anonymous No.3982607]

>>3982567
https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/858352141781610496
>I didn't have enough money to buy an Amiga, but I was able to rent an IBM PC to start working on.

What if things went different and he _did_ acquire an Amiga back then? Would id have saved the Amiga releasing Wolf3D, Doom and Quake for AGA systems rather than effectively providing the nails for the Amiga's coffin?

[Anonymous No.3982619]

>>3982607
>When I was a teenager and still cold calling / physically mailing game publishers, someone at EA suggested I move from Apple 2 to Amiga.

Based old EA, too bad he didn't heed their advice.

[Anonymous No.3982995]

>>3982579
This.

[Anonymous No.3983000]

>>3982579
>>3982995
>brown kids thinking their shithole matters
America is the only market that matter.

[Anonymous No.3983002]

>>3983000
>Says the guy living off the Japanese market in the 80's and 90's
Irony at it's finest.

[Anonymous No.3983008]

>>3983002
Don't think you understand that nearly all PC companies are American or heavily influenced by America.

[Anonymous No.3983009]

>>3982584
Those where not "shitty ports", Dune II supported 2MB ChipRAM too if you had it, that looks like a pretty good port to me.

>but again not that many owned A600 or A1200
America much?

Not that the argument of people owning a particular system is in any way related to this discussion or an argument.

[Anonymous No.3983012]

>>3983008
What are you talking about?
We where talking about the game and console market crash.
With some idiot giving an argument that "hurr America only matters" while their own market was full of Japanese import consoles and their games.

[Anonymous No.3983015]

>>3983012
If you want to talk about just consoles the market was started by America and America is by far the largest market. So yes you're a fucking idiot.

[Anonymous No.3983019]

>>3983015
This is the sweetest ignorance and irony I have seen in awhile.
Thanks.

[Anonymous No.3983025]

>>3983019
True facts hurt sometimes.

[Anonymous No.3985406]

>>3968649
In those days, I benefitted from convincing friends/family to go for different systems. It was not easy to play all the best stuff with a limited budget then. Arcades had their own experiences. I was a Nintendo house, convinced my cousins to go for Sega, older cousins had all the old pre-Nintendo stuff like Atari and 8086 computers. I also got the NEC systems when they were cheap, but never had the chance to own the NeoGeo due to costs, and mostly relied on the arcades. Eventually at some point I figured a computer would be best for doing schoolwork, and it had the side benefit of some pretty good games too.

There was no "console war" since I was the only person in school to have videogames. Until some kids started getting LCD games (Tiger, Konami, etc.) and graduating to the Gameboy, which I never had (stuck with consoles). I do remember playing both Final Fantasy 2 (4) for SNES and Ultima 7 on my PC around the same time, and both were amazing in their own right.

I find the "console/system wars" is just amusing from the sidelines these days, but I never directly experienced that in its day. There was no superiority debate, and I never felt the need for it in those days, or maybe I was naïve. The closest I saw was just magazines with a slant towards a platform, just because it was their focus.

[Anonymous No.3985884]

>>3968649
>Were PC gamers edgelords back in the days like nowadays? I can't remember PC gaming really being a thing, since I always had home consoles just like my friends.
>Nowadays, PC gaming is seen as "superior" and PC gamers call themselves the "master race". I've never seen anything like this in the past.


No, not at all. I remember playing Everquest shortly after it first came out, and the community was full of friendly people. I don't recall the word "Gamer" being tossed around, people who enjoyed games just played them, with no need to join some community.

In fact, that is how most of the Internet was back in the 90s.. communities did not exist to the extent they do today, most of us were just a bunch of introverts browsing various web pages, building our own, and chatting a bit on IRC, yahoo, and a few other places. The Internet is a completely different beast now.

As computers became easier, the morons of the world took over the Internet, no longer did you need to configure winsock through Trumpet, set the correct IRQ on your modem to work with your mouse, etc.. it has become easy enough for anyone to connect to the Internet or have a tech come out and setup their connection for them.

As a result, all of these "communities" of morons have formed, filled with a ton of egotistical idiots who have a deep seated desire to push their way up the social ladder. A lot of modern gamers remind me of jocks in the 80s, just the overall disgusting competitive mentality, and ego driven drivel. You did not see that very often in the 90s online, it was just rare.

One of the things I like about 4chan, is that it puts us all on an equal playing field, we can be dicks all we want, but there is no social ladder here. We are all anonymous. This section is close to what the old Internet felt like.

[Anonymous No.3985906]

>>3968649
Yes, Alien-ware and Voodoo PC gaymur shit goes way back.
>>3972969
Any game that isn't ancient Nintendies SNES/SuperFamicom tier still takes countless nights spent troubleshooting
SOTC won't emulate with an acceptable frame-rate on a brand new rig no matter what I do, and to this day there still isn't good N64 emulation for many popular games like Goldeneye and Dankey Kang

[Anonymous No.3985949]

>>3985906
>Yes, Alien-ware and Voodoo PC gaymur shit goes way back.
1997 is not "way back", it's literary in the middle of the PC lifetime

[Anonymous No.3985951]

>>3985906
>Any game that isn't ancient Nintendies SNES/SuperFamicom tier still takes countless nights spent troubleshooting
>SOTC won't emulate with an acceptable frame-rate on a brand new rig no matter what I do, and to this day there still isn't good N64 emulation for many popular games like Goldeneye and Dankey Kang
Are you mentally challenged?

[Anonymous No.3986053]

>>3985884
>As computers became easier, the morons of the world took over the Internet, no longer did you need to configure winsock through Trumpet, set the correct IRQ on your modem to work with your mouse, etc.. it has become easy enough for anyone to connect to the Internet or have a tech come out and setup their connection for them.

Rubbish. There is no relation between being good technically and having intelligence in other areas. It's also so elitist to suggest people with less intelligence are "morons". You do remind me of the smug superiority complexes of some people from the old days of the internet, imagine actually believing that being good at linux makes you smart.

[Anonymous No.3986059]

>>3985884
This, with some caveats. Not just the morons of the world, but almost literally everybody who doesn't live in a poverty stricken hellhole, has access to the internet and online gaming now. If you REALLY want to point fingers at what caused the sort of caustic attitudes that surround gaming nowadays, the elephant in the room is mainstreaming.

Anyone and everyone can get on social media, an MMO, the online contingent of a popular game, and make an ass of themselves. More importantly, with the emergence of meme culture, most people are encouraged to make asses of themselves on the internet. Back in the day, none of that mattered. The internet was simply a place where you chatted with a few friends who had it, swapped shareware, made some websites, shared cool ones you found, and played some D3D, Doom, CS, Quake, etc, with some randos. You'd probably also look up cheat codes, guides or some porn.

[Anonymous No.3986061]

>>3986053
No, but the samples of actual morons increase, with the massive numbers of normal, non-technical people coming through the internet access "gate."

[Anonymous No.3986126]

>>3986053
It's true though, people with interest for technology used the internet back then, now everyone does.

[Anonymous No.3986489]

>>3986053
Just because you're good a discipline doesn't mean you're intellectually greater. There are people who are competent surgeons that are part of the flat earth society.

Being able to solve a problem like setting up a DOS or even win98 is something a lot of peaple struggle with. You've seen the video of teens getting handed phones from the early 2000s? They couldn't figure them out for 10s of minutes if at all.
>>3985884
What this guy mentions about modern gamers is true. They are completely different to back then. Just look at the biggest competitive game DOTA. These kids throw around terms like "toxic", "cuck", "fuckboi", etc all day. They're extremely thin skinned too. You call one a nigger and they'll throw the game more often then not.

If you want an objective example just look at old games like battlefield and how they changed. Boost servers were the norm and now they are looked at like hacks. Custom servers are basically a thing of the past in FPSes also.

[Anonymous No.3986579]

>>3986489
>Custom servers are basically a thing of the past in FPSes also.
I wish it wasn't the exact opposite for Counter-Strike nowadays - I absolutely cannot find a vanilla server (or a server where the only custom thing are maps), every server is running some half-assed mod that completely changes the gameplay

[Anonymous No.3986604]

>>3986579
That's just because it's what Russians want to play. CS is not alone. The group of American players wanting to play older FPSes online is very small. Multiple reasons can be blamed.

[Anonymous No.3987408]

The funniest thing about all of this? Console gamers don't give a shit about what PC gamers think. They don't even separate "console vs. PC" in their heads, and they never have. All the rage, all the wink wink nudge nudge we're better, all that horse shit, is completely and totally on the strictly PC gamer side. It's so.fucking. weird. That people actually congratulate each other because they bought a computer to play video games on. Is there anything more pathetic? It's so laughable. And there's guys out there that are VENOMOUS about their so-called "PC loyalty". If only they could see themselves how everyone else sees them...

[Anonymous No.3987423]

>>3987408
>onsole gamers don't give a shit about what PC gamers think.
You cared enough to make that post, dirty peasant.

[Anonymous No.3987445]

>>3987408

>That people actually congratulate each other because they bought a computer to play video games on

The alternative is retardedly buying a computer that can't effectively play video games, despite PC being the superior platform for playing most games.

[Anonymous No.3987447]

>>3987408
The funniest thing about all of this? PC gamers don't give a shit about what console gamers think. They don't even separate "console vs. PC" in their heads, and they never have. All the rage, all the wink wink nudge nudge we're better, all that horse shit, is completely and totally on the strictly console gamer side. It's so.fucking. weird. That people actually congratulate each other because they bought a console to play video games on. Is there anything more pathetic? It's so laughable. And there's guys out there that are VENOMOUS about their so-called "console loyalty". If only they could see themselves how everyone else sees them...

[Anonymous No.3987450]

>>3987447
LOL rekd

[Anonymous No.3987621]

[Anonymous No.3987623]

[Anonymous No.3987627]

>>3987621
>>3987623
Why did you post this?

[Anonymous No.3987649]

>>3987627
Autism.

[Anonymous No.3987730]

>>3987649
>autism is the answer to everything
ok

[Anonymous No.3987735]

>>3987730
Pretty much

[Anonymous No.3989369]

>>3987621
>tfw he's me on the music part
I know that Vidya albums are catching on, but I really wish it were more like Japan, where just about every Vidya had the soundtrack album on the market, and not just the vidya that has generic music.

[Anonymous No.3989897]

>>3969039
>I don't understand how to beat him without cheating
sounds like this guy needed a PRO TIP

[Anonymous No.3989906]

>>3989897
>screen with the cheat on
comedy gold

[Anonymous No.3989932]

>>3989906
you sure about that?

[Anonymous No.3990238]

>>3989897
The final boss was *slightly* more tactical than that, in fairness. Taking advantage of an engine "feature" and all.