The problem with Amstrad games

Discuss and discover all the great games of yesteryear!

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

Post Reply
User avatar
RocketRanger
Posts: 411
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:32 am

Post by RocketRanger » Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:53 pm

Opa-Opa wrote:
Ritchardo mkII wrote:
Does make you think about what could have been achieved by Amstrad if they'd got in on the act a little quicker.
Thats the trouble with only making nasty cheap knock off machines - You have to wait untill some else has done all the hard work such as inventing and building something before you can steal it....
That's how Microsoft develop Windows, doesn't do them any harm :P

User avatar
woody.cool
Posts: 8809
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 3:29 am
Location: Northampton, UK
Contact:

Post by woody.cool » Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:57 pm

RocketRanger wrote:
Opa-Opa wrote:
Ritchardo mkII wrote:
Does make you think about what could have been achieved by Amstrad if they'd got in on the act a little quicker.
Thats the trouble with only making nasty cheap knock off machines - You have to wait untill some else has done all the hard work such as inventing and building something before you can steal it....
That's how Microsoft develop Windows, doesn't do them any harm :P
Yeah! But Microsoft buy out anyone who tries to oppose them.

User avatar
Ritchardo mkII
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:00 pm

Post by Ritchardo mkII » Thu Jul 26, 2007 7:19 pm

Opa-Opa wrote:
Ritchardo mkII wrote:
Does make you think about what could have been achieved by Amstrad if they'd got in on the act a little quicker.
Thats the trouble with only making nasty cheap knock off machines - You have to wait untill some else has done all the hard work such as inventing and building something before you can steal it....
Yeah! Eat that Charles Babbage!

I assume the knock-off machine comment is to do with it using the same chip as the Spectrum. This will be the same chip developed in 1976 by Intel?

On a related note, did you know that Goodyear tyres are a cheap knock off of a Mr. F. Flintstone of Bedrock, USA who created the first wheel from stone around 24,000 years ago. What a shower of robbing bastards!
Am I Not online? Try: www.cpczone.net

User avatar
Spector
Posts: 2476
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 5:44 pm

Post by Spector » Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:20 am

I always looked at Sir Clive as a guy that wanted to actually make a difference to society with technology and wasn't in it just for money, whereas Sir Alan seemed purely concerned with profit.

The Sinclair Executive Calculator was a technical jump ahead of the rest when it came out in 1972 as well as being cheaper, but it also went on show at the Museum of Modern Art in New York, such was the appeal of the design. The 48K Speccy was also a great looking machine, as indeed was the stylish 128+ model.

Then Sugar takes over and what do we have? A grey plastic box with a tape recorder that fast forwards slower than it plays and doesn't have a tape counter. But hey, at least it has "DATACORDER" in gaudy multicoloured writing on the front. Ooh, how futuristic! :D

The Amstrad CPC range looked just as bad. Check out that horrible red button on the tacked on player. I bet it came off when you blew on it.

In saying that, I'd still like to play the Amstrad. The blocky hi-colour graphics may be like looking at a parrot through a pair of broken glasses, but they are interesting, especially Target Renegade and Chase HQ.

User avatar
Gryzor
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2005 4:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Post by Gryzor » Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:26 am

Ritchardo mkII wrote:
Opa-Opa wrote:
Ritchardo mkII wrote:
Does make you think about what could have been achieved by Amstrad if they'd got in on the act a little quicker.
Thats the trouble with only making nasty cheap knock off machines - You have to wait untill some else has done all the hard work such as inventing and building something before you can steal it....
Yeah! Eat that Charles Babbage!

I assume the knock-off machine comment is to do with it using the same chip as the Spectrum. This will be the same chip developed in 1976 by Intel?

On a related note, did you know that Goodyear tyres are a cheap knock off of a Mr. F. Flintstone of Bedrock, USA who created the first wheel from stone around 24,000 years ago. What a shower of robbing bastards!
Well, he had said so in another thread... I don't find it very humorous, rather flame-bordering, and of course it's a silly argument. Of course the CPC was not a knock off of any particular computer, like most of the Z80 machines back then. Clive was not the first in the race, and was not the last. Sugar's success was in combining all sorts of common items to build something that worked (and was of a much higher manufacturing quality than the competition to boot).

User avatar
Opa-Opa
Posts: 4304
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Post by Opa-Opa » Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:29 am

Ritchardo mkII wrote: On a related note, did you know that Goodyear tyres are a cheap knock off of a Mr. F. Flintstone of Bedrock, USA who created the first wheel from stone around 24,000 years ago. What a shower of robbing bastards!
Aww look, thats so cute... The poor deluded CPC owner thinks the cartoon antics of stoneage man are real...

Don't worry, I'll try and explain so it don't hurt too much :)....
Gryzor wrote: Sugar's success was in combining all sorts of common items to build something that worked (and was of a much higher manufacturing quality than the competition to boot).
This statment is so wrong it's funny... EVERYTHING amstrad ever made has been a cheap, nasty copy of someone else's product made using cheap nasty parts.

They (amstrad) see what is making money then clone it, badly.
Of all those TV's, Video recorders and HiFi's that they pumped out of their factorys were well known to be of poor reliabilty, how many of us still own the amazing amstrad 4 track recording studio for example...
Last edited by Opa-Opa on Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Gryzor
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2005 4:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Post by Gryzor » Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:31 am

Spector wrote:I always looked at Sir Clive as a guy that wanted to actually make a difference to society with technology and wasn't in it just for money, whereas Sir Alan seemed purely concerned with profit.

The Sinclair Executive Calculator was a technical jump ahead of the rest when it came out in 1972 as well as being cheaper, but it also went on show at the Museum of Modern Art in New York, such was the appeal of the design. The 48K Speccy was also a great looking machine, as indeed was the stylish 128+ model.

Then Sugar takes over and what do we have? A grey plastic box with a tape recorder that fast forwards slower than it plays and doesn't have a tape counter. But hey, at least it has "DATACORDER" in gaudy multicoloured writing on the front. Ooh, how futuristic! :D

The Amstrad CPC range looked just as bad. Check out that horrible red button on the tacked on player. I bet it came off when you blew on it.

In saying that, I'd still like to play the Amstrad. The blocky hi-colour graphics may be like looking at a parrot through a pair of broken glasses, but they are interesting, especially Target Renegade and Chase HQ.
I think that talking about how Sinclair was a visionary is old news, really. He was, and he built some wonderful products that were ahead of their era - and some that flopped badly. And indeed Sugar was an entrepreneur - he never hid the fact. (By the way, I don't think you'll find many Amstrad users adoring him, because he always made it absolutely clear that he was in it for the money and not for the vision; but you *will* find many Spectrum users who would be ready to convince themselves that if Clive invented the pocket nuclear bomb for kids aged 3-5 it'd still be a sign of his vision and of things to come.)

But I think that the 464 and the 664 really looked nice. The 6128 was also quite sleek and business-like, which was the intention.

User avatar
SirClive
Posts: 20261
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 2:25 pm
Location: Planet Sinclair
Contact:

Post by SirClive » Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:39 am

I don't think Spectrum fans blindly follow Sir Sinclair. The guy IS a visionary, and yes he has made a few bombs, but don't kid yourself that he only had one success.

The ZX80 was a success
The ZX81 was a success
All of his Spectrums (16k/48k/48k+/128k) were a success
His calculators were a success

His strange desire to revolutionary the way we travel is a bit baffling, but if that is his holy grail then good luck to him.
Image

User avatar
Gryzor
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2005 4:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Post by Gryzor » Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:48 am

SirClive wrote:I don't think Spectrum fans blindly follow Sir Sinclair. The guy IS a visionary, and yes he has made a few bombs, but don't kid yourself that he only had one success.
Where did I say that? :D

By the way, a while back I read his biography (sadly off a scanned version I found online), very interesting read...

Incidentally, The ZX80/81 may have been revolutionary, but not the Speccies, surely? More of an evolution, rather...

User avatar
The Master
Posts: 7252
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 4:01 pm
Location: the isle of everywhere

Post by The Master » Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:49 am

SirClive wrote:I don't think Spectrum fans blindly follow Sir Sinclair. The guy IS a visionary, and yes he has made a few bombs, but don't kid yourself that he only had one success.

The ZX80 was a success
The ZX81 was a success
All of his Spectrums (16k/48k/48k+/128k) were a success
His calculators were a success

His strange desire to revolutionary the way we travel is a bit baffling, but if that is his holy grail then good luck to him.
you fancy him

User avatar
Opa-Opa
Posts: 4304
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Post by Opa-Opa » Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:53 am

The Master wrote:
SirClive wrote:I don't think Spectrum fans blindly follow Sir Sinclair. The guy IS a visionary, and yes he has made a few bombs, but don't kid yourself that he only had one success.

The ZX80 was a success
The ZX81 was a success
All of his Spectrums (16k/48k/48k+/128k) were a success
His calculators were a success

His strange desire to revolutionary the way we travel is a bit baffling, but if that is his holy grail then good luck to him.
you fancy him
:lol: "you know that beardy wierdy bloke who made cheap tat through out the 80's and 90's...?"

" I am Aware of the chap"

"thats you that is..." "you want to be him".....

User avatar
SirClive
Posts: 20261
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 2:25 pm
Location: Planet Sinclair
Contact:

Post by SirClive » Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:54 am

The Master wrote:
SirClive wrote:I don't think Spectrum fans blindly follow Sir Sinclair. The guy IS a visionary, and yes he has made a few bombs, but don't kid yourself that he only had one success.

The ZX80 was a success
The ZX81 was a success
All of his Spectrums (16k/48k/48k+/128k) were a success
His calculators were a success

His strange desire to revolutionary the way we travel is a bit baffling, but if that is his holy grail then good luck to him.
you fancy him
:lol: You have been on form over the last week or so, must be something in your toast!
Image

User avatar
RocketRanger
Posts: 411
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:32 am

Post by RocketRanger » Fri Jul 27, 2007 6:50 am

You guys are real mature. :D

If you LOVE him so much why don't you MARRY him?

Despite my soft spot for the CPC having grown up with the 464 and 6128, I certainly agree with Opa's point about Amstrad taking what was good about other brands and making cheaper consumer tat, that's pretty much their entire business model.

Spectrum vs CPC? Pah....not much in it really. The C64 was a better games machine :P

User avatar
Gryzor
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2005 4:29 am
Location: Athens, Greece
Contact:

Post by Gryzor » Fri Jul 27, 2007 7:02 am

RocketRanger wrote: Despite my soft spot for the CPC having grown up with the 464 and 6128, I certainly agree with Opa's point about Amstrad taking what was good about other brands and making cheaper consumer tat, that's pretty much their entire business model.
Almost... but not quite. While NOONE says Amstrad was a synonym of innovation (I do wonder why counter-arguments keep coming up, while there's no argument), the business model was taking what was good, putting it together, and giving more value for money to the consumer. Not "cheaper".

User avatar
Opa-Opa
Posts: 4304
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Post by Opa-Opa » Fri Jul 27, 2007 7:24 am

Gryzor wrote:
Almost... but not quite. While NOONE says Amstrad was a synonym of innovation (I do wonder why counter-arguments keep coming up, while there's no argument), the business model was taking what was good, putting it together, and giving more value for money to the consumer. Not "cheaper".

Having to buy the same "product" twice in a short space of time because the the first one you bought (amstrad) kept falling apart or just not working as it should is not good value for money.

The Pioneer stack system I bought in the 80's for around £900.00 which still works 100% including surround sound, twin aux ports etc etc was great value for money because I have not had to buy another one in all that time.
You would be very lucky to have a 5 year old amstrad sound system still working.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests