RE: "No, You're Not a Blogger!" (Hive Edition - Meme)

You are viewing a single comment's thread:

That gamers thing is funny because they claim to be gamers but don’t know what a game is.

Hell, the amount of times I died trying to play R-Type I and II and never clocking it is futility defined.

But playing Call of Duty or whatever lame first person game for hours on end with gamer mates is not even close to three 90 minute games of Sensible World of Soccer on the Amiga.

Or endless days perfecting flying a helicopter through a tunnel in the side of a mountain in Gunship 2000.

Gaming is not about the platform. A gamer is someone who is platform and game agnostic but NEEDS to play a game.

The exact same thing can be said about blogging. We’re encouraged to speak more so that’s what we do. Blogging allows us to write what we feel even if that doesn’t appeal to others.

Blogging is like a fart… better out than in.



0
0
0.000
9 comments
avatar

Never heard about this "Sensible World of Soccer" but I looked it up and it doesn't look bad... I don't think there's an objective definition of a "Gamer" and I consider anyone who plays a lot of games (or a lot of one game) a Gamer.

Some elitists want to use words that refer uniquely to them, they don't want to share their "pride" with the common people, not that wasting 1000+ hours on video games should be anyone's pride.

As for blogging, it's hard to make a lot of content and not make it bad... The fear of posting bad quality stops me of making things like this post often, but this time I was too excited about the idea to care. Haha.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Sensible World of Soccer is no longer available. It was an Amiga game back in the 90s. I played it to death with my mate.

My first ever multi-player game was Dogfight on an old Apple IIe. You'll never understand competitive gaming until you've got 8 people crowded around 1 keyboard. 🤣

0
0
0.000
avatar

Found it on a retro game site, "Sensible World of Soccer" is more interesting than I thought it would be:

!PIZZA

0
0
0.000
avatar

Looked WAAAAAAAY better on the Amiga. PCs sucked for gaming at that time.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I assume it would look better... CRT TVs had strange quirks, and most games at the time made use of CRT screens' quirks to make their games look much better.

Something people nowadays are trying to recreate digitally:

0
0
0.000
avatar

Oh no, at the time SWOS was released the Amiga had a colour palette of 16.8 million colours with 257,000 onscreen at any one time. PCs at the time had a colour palette of 4098 with 256 onscreen at any one time.

Ironically, those PC stats were where the Amiga was at release.

PCs were crap and Macs were black and white but had a graphical interface.

Computing has come a long way since then.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Yeah, nowadays every screen can easily support 16M colors.

A $35 on-board computer can outperformance thousands of Amigas at the same time.

0
0
0.000
avatar

That’s true but weirdly not by much. What made the Amiga different was that most of the work was done by hardware not software like it is today. If the Amiga ran on Apple’s silicon using the same setup as in the 80s and 90s you’d see that Amiga blitzing a Mac in terms of raw power. In fact, there wouldn’t be a computer around that could match it. And I’m talking massive supercomputer rigs.

Half the OS was on a dedicated chip. ALL graphics went to the graphics card and ALL audio went to the audio card. This left the CPU doing all the heavy crunching without getting bogged down processing audio and graphics then handing off to the audio and graphics cards.

The Amiga was doing in 14mHz what PCs were struggling to do in 1gHz.

Memory usage was extremely low as a result. I once had 17 apps open including the following:

3D ray trace rendering
Paint application
Web browser
Email client
Word processor
Spreadsheet
A couple of games
And some other smaller apps

All in 3 megabytes of RAM. Try running just one of those these days in the same amount of RAM.

The Amiga was the most powerful desktop computer around but just disappeared because of various CEOs who didn’t understand computers not knowing what they had.

Basically what happened to the Amiga is what happened to early Apple when Jobs got booted out. Unfortunately Amiga never had a Steve Jobs to save them.

0
0
0.000
avatar

That's impressive at the time...

Reminded of the PS2. It also had an impressive architecture that only a few games out of thousands got close to its Hardware Potential.

0
0
0.000