🚀 go-pugleaf

On 7/5/2017 10:04 AM, Ross Ridge wrote:
> Mike S.  <Mik...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> And as for graphics, are you sure it looks better on the C-128 even
>> after a graphical scaler like hq3x is applied in Dosbox?
> 
> I'm sure you can use the same scalers under a Commodore 128 emulator, but
> I've never really liked them personally myself.  The slightly improved
> graphics I'm talking about a result of the PC and C64/C128 ports being
> done by different people from the same base Apple II game.  Both games
> greatly improved on the Apple II graphics, both use a resolution of
> 320x200, but the Commodore port is supposed to be slightly better done.
> At least as far as the tile sets go.  Looking at dungeon screenshots the
> PC version looks noticeably better, the C64/C128 dungeons appear to be
> using 160x200 graphics, so maybe I'm wrong here.
> 
>>> The Bard's Tale games and Dragon Age probably play
>>> better on the Amiga for similar reasons.
>>
>> The Bard's Tale looks and sounds better on the Amiga winUAE emulator
>> but the DOS version plays better in DosBox. At least that was my
>> experience when I played through the Bard's Tale a few years ago.
> 
> Yah, when I tried running the C64, Amiga and IBM PC versions of Pool
> of Radiance to see what version was better, I found using WinUAE to be
> a pain.  That was something like 15 years ago though.  I was kind hoping
> that the state of Amiga emulation had improved by now.
> 
> The great thing about DOSBox is that it's designed to play games first
> and foremost.  (It's actually kind of a crappy emulator for things
> aren't games.)  I remember reading a post by the person behind UAE or
> WinUAE about how upset they were that all people wanted to do with it
> was play games.
> 
They expected people to run WordStar and Lotus spreadsheets?

-- 
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation 
instinct are running screaming.