Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Discuss and discover all the great games of yesteryear!

Moderators: mknott, NickThorpe, lcarlson, Darran@Retro Gamer, MMohammed

Which was better?

The 64. SID power!
28
41%
The ZX. Cheaper and cooler.
28
41%
I was the odd CPC kid
8
12%
Atari forever!
4
6%
Something else entirely
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 68

User avatar
PostieDoc
Posts: 800
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2013 4:40 pm

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by PostieDoc » Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:24 am

I was going to vote Something else entirely for my Plus/4, then I decided that would be silly.

User avatar
Darran@Retro Gamer
Posts: 6765
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 11:34 am
Location: Bournemouth
Contact:

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by Darran@Retro Gamer » Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:44 am

I thought we cleared this up with our Spectrum Vs Commodore article :wink:

It's clearly the NES.
Image

User avatar
mrmessy
Posts: 309
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:06 am
Location: The middle of England
Contact:

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by mrmessy » Tue Apr 26, 2016 10:56 am

The Cave Wizard game does look good. So if the C64 was capable of that, why did so many games go for the sun-faded Lego brick look? It doesn't make sense.
'79:Micro5500> '83:Spec(48K)> '84:Spec+(kit)> '86:Spec128> '88:ST> '90:A500> '93:A1200> '93:SNES> '95:PS1> '99:PC> '02:PS2> '05:Xbox> '12:X360> '14:PS4... XboxLive:messy73, PSN:mrmessy73, YouTube:mrmessyschannel

User avatar
paranoid marvin
Posts: 14272
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: 21st Century Earth

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by paranoid marvin » Tue Apr 26, 2016 11:05 am

'Best' for me in relation to C64 and Speccy is which had the best games, not which had a faster processor , better resolution or sound chip.

For every great C64 game there is an equally great Speccy game.

For example there's a brilliant Speccy game called Journey's End. Graphically it doesn't look great and sound is on-descript, but once you start playing you ignore all that because it has gameplay in bucketloads.

There's also an ace C64 game called Labyrinth (by Activision) Based on the movie, it's a fore-runner to SCUMM games. It's graphically very good with neat tunes and a very enjoyable storyline.

It's a bit like the Speccy and C64 - sometimes the graphics on one version were better than the other, sometimes the gameplay was better. For every poor arcade conversion on the C64 there's a poor port for the Speccy, and for every ace conversion there's another that's just as good.

Unless you have both machines, it's guaranteed you'll be missing out.
Mr Flibble says...
"Game over , boys!"

retrofan011
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:45 am

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by retrofan011 » Tue Apr 26, 2016 11:37 am

Matt_B wrote:Er... no. It scrolls vertically a pixel a time. You might be confusing it with the sprites that move in exact character squares.
I clearly pointed out that I'm talking about character moving sprites (most of them blocky and ugly), and all this is for just one reason, to avoid colour clash, but still unsuccessfully.
Of course, the screen is moved vertically at pixel time, but with visible dithering.

@The Beans

Not so great 2902 post.
The lack of arguments in the discussion, somtimes produced such frustration..
But, for the record,this is my first appearance on this forum, despite what you're implying..

@mrmessy

Because over time, developers were finding out better ways to exploit the full potential of the machine.
The possibility of mixing hardware sprites and MC mode prevailed, but later we got better and better techniques (eg. mixing mc mode and hires sprites) and some unbelievably good games..

psj3809
Posts: 18883
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 10:28 am

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by psj3809 » Tue Apr 26, 2016 11:40 am

^But at the end of the day we're just going to vote for our favourite aren't we ? You wont change your mind, nor will I

You've probably come over from a C64 forum which mentioned this thread (As so far all your posts are just to do with this classic 'argument') so whatever reasoned argument Speccy fans post you'll never accept them anyway !

User avatar
Matt_B
Posts: 5458
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:30 am
Location: 5 minutes from the beach, 30 seconds from the pub

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by Matt_B » Tue Apr 26, 2016 11:57 am

retrofan011 wrote:
Matt_B wrote:Er... no. It scrolls vertically a pixel a time. You might be confusing it with the sprites that move in exact character squares.
I clearly pointed out that I'm talking about character moving sprites (most of them blocky and ugly), and all this is for just one reason, to avoid colour clash, but still unsuccessfully.
Of course, the screen is moved vertically at pixel time, but with visible dithering.
Clearly? :lol:

I'm guessing that English isn't your first language so I should cut you a little slack, but suffice it to say that Lightforce is an ample demonstration of the Spectrum's ability to smoothly scroll a multi-coloured background plane without obvious colour clash, albeit with certain other restrictions. What you think of the resulting graphics is irrelevant to the technical discussion.

retrofan011
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:45 am

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by retrofan011 » Tue Apr 26, 2016 12:16 pm

Matt_B wrote:
retrofan011 wrote:
Matt_B wrote:Er... no. It scrolls vertically a pixel a time. You might be confusing it with the sprites that move in exact character squares.
I clearly pointed out that I'm talking about character moving sprites (most of them blocky and ugly), and all this is for just one reason, to avoid colour clash, but still unsuccessfully.
Of course, the screen is moved vertically at pixel time, but with visible dithering.
Clearly? :lol:

I'm guessing that English isn't your first language so I should cut you a little slack, but suffice it to say that Lightforce is an ample demonstration of the Spectrum's ability to smoothly scroll a multi-coloured background plane without obvious colour clash, albeit with certain other restrictions. What you think of the resulting graphics is irrelevant to the technical discussion.
"Smoothly"?
"Without obvious colour clash"
"With certain other restriction"
Yes, I could agree with you.. :lol:
psj3809 wrote:^But at the end of the day we're just going to vote for our favourite aren't we ? You wont change your mind, nor will I

You've probably come over from a C64 forum which mentioned this thread (As so far all your posts are just to do with this classic 'argument') so whatever reasoned argument Speccy fans post you'll never accept them anyway !
What arguments from Speccy fans?
Usual 'Sun-faded Lego brick, brown mantra?
Dont make me laugh, please.

User avatar
Bluce_Ree
Posts: 1064
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 6:50 am

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by Bluce_Ree » Tue Apr 26, 2016 12:30 pm

Speccy. Clearly.

If you vote for anything else then you're clearly an e-wing clarty sex beast.
Image

User avatar
paranoid marvin
Posts: 14272
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: 21st Century Earth

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by paranoid marvin » Tue Apr 26, 2016 12:37 pm

Look at Bombjack on the C64 - great SID tunes, nice colourful graphics. The Speccy version has no music, average (at best) effects and minimal colour. But most importantly, the Speccy version plays far,far better than the C64 version.

Just because a machine has better hardware, doesn't mean that the games are any better. For any C64 owner , would you prefer the Amiga or the 64 version of Wizball?
Mr Flibble says...
"Game over , boys!"

User avatar
sscott
Posts: 13157
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 3:26 pm
Location: Sheffield

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by sscott » Tue Apr 26, 2016 1:50 pm

Or.. which one do you own? The kind of thread we had in the early days. I vote neither! ;)
Image

User avatar
outdated_gamer
Posts: 2599
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 12:14 pm

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by outdated_gamer » Tue Apr 26, 2016 2:56 pm

Matt_B wrote: The Spectrum certainly was designed to a much tighter budget, as you'd expect for something that was half the price when the C64 launched, but it does have one significant technical advantage over the C64 that goes a long way to offsetting the shortcomings, and that's a CPU that's clocked faster and with a much richer instruction set. Most games that are computationally expensive tend to perform better on it, such as the isometric arcade adventures that were a mainstay of the Spectrum scene from 1984 onwards.

It's a bit of a historical accident that the Spectrum has the more expensive CPU of the two, and you've got to go back to the ZX80 and ZX81 to see why. Sinclair's engineers realized that the Z80 could pull double duty as both the CPU and also as an address generator for the video circuitry, saving them a chip and working out cheaper overall. It no longer performed this function in the Spectrum, as Sinclair had managed to find space on the ULA to implement a rudimentary address generator in hardware, but they were still locked into the same CPU for a number of other reasons by that point.
But like you said, the CPU in the Speccy had to do all the work when in the C=64 you had dedicated graphics and sound chips which took care of things the Speccy had to do in software on the CPU alone so the speed advantage was kind of negligible. It's a bit similar situation to the SNES and Mega Drive, or if you prefer, the Amiga and ST situation, where one system had a slower CPU but better graphics and sound hardware and the other had a faster CPU but worse graphics and sound. By definition better graphical and sound capabilities should mean better graphics and sound, the CPU is mainly tasked with game logic, AI and such things. You mention isometric games as an example where the Speccy shined, but I'm pretty sure I've seen some nice-running isometric games on the C=64 (e.g. Paper Boy, Marble Madness, Head Over Heels, etc). I mean the main thing here is a different perspective, otherwise they're still as 2D as 2D gets and when it came to real 3D stuff, neither were particularly good, for proper polygon 3D the ST and Amiga were really the bare minimum. Hard Drivin' runs like crap on both, the Speccy and the C=64, as do many other 3D games, so I doubt the faster CPU really helped much here too.

User avatar
Antiriad2097
Posts: 26860
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: http://s11.zetaboards.com/RetroLeague/
Contact:

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by Antiriad2097 » Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:44 pm

Can't remember the others, but I bought C64 Paperboy. What a waste of money, it looks awful and plays worse. The Speccy version might be a bit ugly in places, but at least its a reasonably playable facsimile of the original.
The Retro League - Where skill isn't an obstacle
Retrocanteen, home of the unfairly banned
Tom_Baker wrote:I just finished watching a film about Stockholm syndrome. It started out terrible but by the end I really liked it.

User avatar
stvd
Posts: 5137
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 3:51 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by stvd » Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:46 pm

retrofan011 wrote:This I will play for a few months on the C64:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVHRGbb ... nFfDsKaTyc
What are you going to play on Spectrum, with similar quality?
Similar quality? What does that even mean?
The graphics looks decent enough but the game itself doesn't look anything special. A Mario/Yoshi's Island rip off.
There are hundreds of Spectrum games that I'd play before the game in the link.
Most with monochrome graphics and crappy sound but still, better games. IMO.
Image

retrofan011
Posts: 12
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:45 am

Re: Which was really better - 64 or ZX?

Post by retrofan011 » Tue Apr 26, 2016 4:13 pm

stvd wrote:
retrofan011 wrote:This I will play for a few months on the C64:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVHRGbb ... nFfDsKaTyc
What are you going to play on Spectrum, with similar quality?
Similar quality? What does that even mean?
The graphics looks decent enough but the game itself doesn't look anything special. A Mario/Yoshi's Island rip off.
There are hundreds of Spectrum games that I'd play before the game in the link.
Most with monochrome graphics and crappy sound but still, better games. IMO.
I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings.
Enjoy your "monochrome graphics and crappy sound" games, I will not disturb you in the future, I promise.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests