not a transcode but pretty good, and the fact that it runs on A500 1MB at 25 fps is great. People tend to underestimate early 1980 hardware but they were already beating every single computer in terms of performance.
Yeah, people forget how insanely optimized those machines were. The Amiga’s custom chips were doing things mainstream PCs couldn’t touch for years. Running this at 25 fps on an A500 with just 1MB is honestly more impressive than a brute-force modern port (for Windows etc..). It’s not a straight transcode, but technically it captures the spirit of squeezing every last cycle out of early 80s/late 80s hardware.
And thanks for your comment, which I really appreciate coming from someone who perfectly understands the amount of work involved in making these kinds of Amiga adaptations. You’re doing a fantastic job with your own ports as well.
On the other hand, I’m honestly tired of hearing the same old nonsense from some ignorant people who jump at every opportunity to dismiss the wonderful AMOS language. At this point, the old myth that Blitz is somehow “better” or “faster” than AMOS just doesn’t hold up anymore. When you actually know how to use it and understand what you’re doing, AMOS is just as valid as any other language.
Cheers mate!
I agree with your point. On the Amiga, raw 100% assembly optimization isn’t always necessary, especially for this kind of game. If you design things properly and make good use of the blitter alongside the CPU, you can get a significant performance boost regardless of the language you’re using—whether it’s C, assembly, AMOS, Blitz, or anything else. In the end, architecture and smart use of the hardware matter more than the specific language.
Best regards, and if you ever need help with graphics, I’d be happy to help you out.