CD32 was underpowered as a console.
SegaCD had better games as did SNES.

AGA in 256 color mode was too slow. They never upgraded the blitter.

A CD32 should have come with an '030 w/fpu and the blitter should have been faster as well to really support the higher res and color modes of AGA.

It was just a 1200 with all the connectors removed...that came out too late.

They didn't pay their bills in China too and that's why you have alot of NOS for sale on ebay. The CD32 made it into the US via Canadian distributors. I bought mine off the shelf at a local shop in Massachusetts. Back then there were local shops still supporting Commodore...

I say A1200 should have had a 030 and 4 meg fastram as default.
And thus it would have been a tide us over into the nextgen.
A nextgen Amiga should have been out no later than 94-95.

With good compatibility with the older ones..

And why do we hang around here if we didnt love the Amiga ?
The architecture and everything ?

The CD32 was even more crippled than the A1200, I got it in 1993 or 94 I believe.
Just before Commodore went down.. Little did I know ...

It could have been pretty good if only AT LEAST they had had a external diskdrive port as default !! But I guess Commodore didnt expect to go under that fast ..

And the CD32 had a somewhat of a success in the UK I believe Ive heard ! Probably the only market it was a success.

For many years my CD32 was a really bad purchase, but then I found downloadable games But now my laser refuses most burned CDs and Im not competent to fix it A taste of heaven, sometimes oh so short ....

I consider buying another from Analogic Computers ... but ugh ... old hardware :-S Maybe better wait till someone make another MiniMig enclosure and buy that ..

@opi

Quote:

And that speaks volumes about how bad Amiga was. Look at expanded A12k, it's Frankenstein of computing.

I was more refering to the trapdoor and PCMCIA slots but yes, the towered thing was a real monster! That said, if they'd put an 030 in and 4MB of RAM in as standard then it wouldn't necessarily have needed to be that expandable I guess.

I still think the A1200 was one of the best, but as others have said it was 3/4 years too late... shame.

Rude!

_________________
2017 Camaro 2SS

@trans

Quote:

SVGA wasn't really affordable until the mid 90s.

I have here price lists for hardware/software from that time and I can assure you: it was possible to buy 80386SX 25 MHz based computer with SVGA 256 kB card for less than 1000 USD in 1992.

Prices of VGA/SVGA cards massively dropped around 1990/1991.

@pavlor

But they did not run AmigaOS ....
Nor were as nice to program on..

@Mr_DBUG

and were not able to drag screens...

I really like my AGA based computer. Yes, it is slower than my 486SX notebook and has less splendid user interface than my PowerBook 165, but even with its limitations it is still my computer of choice.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: I have here price lists for hardware/software from that time and I can assure you: it was possible to buy 80386SX 25 MHz based computer with SVGA 256 kB card for less than 1000 USD in 1992.

A600/A1200 where about half that price, weren't they? But I still agree that A1200/A600 were too little, too late.

Why didn't Commodore just double the resolution, and take three of the chipset and apply each to a different color, R G B. I saw a hack of three Amigas combined doing that once. It could have been done in short order and bam, high-res 24bit color.

But then of course, I think their general mistake was to target the low end of the market with computers that tried to take on the high-end. Inevitably their margins were squeezed to death.

@trans

Commodore owed a lot of money when they were waiting for the factory in the Philippines to ship more CD32's. The import rulling would have come from Commodore's bad finances, not because the Judge had a bad grasp of economics.

_________________
Amiga A1200, 3.1 ROMs, Blizzard 1230 MKIV 64MB & FPU, 4GB DoM SSD, Workbench 3.1

@all

Amiga died, because Commodore died. Not the other way. Amiga did not killed Commodore even if it was already lacking behind in pure hardware technology by late 1992. Sales weren't poor. Same goes for the software houses; take a look at CD sales (for the CD32 that goes). Many of its games managed to stay up a #1 in UK CD-Rom Charts for months! Having sold 100.000 machines just some months after the initial (terrible aka Dangerous Streets) launch is impressive and shows the power of the brand back then. If you are looking for reasons behind failure of Amiga, take a look at 500. The bless and curse of Amiga, imo. The most diverse machine of all times (computer and console), the machine with a huge financial success an titles developed to drain every bit of its power, the machine that ultimately stall many amigans from upgrading.
Furthermore, most known software (gaming) houses kept with the amiga market for more than 1.5 years after Commodore died. It was by mid-late 1995 that Elvis truly left the building ; Gremlin, Psygnosis, Reflections, Team17 etc (with some scarce exceptions of course).
And if you are after for the most impressive console of 90s, I would suggest taking a look at Dreamcast (for obvious reasons) and 3DO (for having the most impressive platform conversations of that time e.g. Microcosm).

_________________

That's how the CD32 would have looked like in a socialist system:
http://commodore-gg.hobby.nl/okt2009col/okt063.JPG
That's my "BSS01", made in GDR.
At least the mechanical quality is not bad...

Last edited by DrZarkov on 16-Mar-2011 at 04:47 PM.

@Cool_amigaN

I had a Panasonic 3DO FZ-1 (probably the best 3DO machine made) and I agree, totally amazing. Wing Commander III and Space Hulk blew me away!

_________________
Amiga A1200, 3.1 ROMs, Blizzard 1230 MKIV 64MB & FPU, 4GB DoM SSD, Workbench 3.1

@DrZarkov

Awesome! There was some Sinclair clones sold behind the iron curtain I believe, wooden cases and suchlike!

_________________
Amiga A1200, 3.1 ROMs, Blizzard 1230 MKIV 64MB & FPU, 4GB DoM SSD, Workbench 3.1

@pavlor

Quote:

Lower resolutions than common SVGA cards AGA: 640x480 8bit, no chunky SVGA: up to 1024x768 8bit (limited by the avaiable GFX memory, only 800x600 4bit with 256 kB)

Ever heard of AGA 1024x768 screenmodes? These worked fine with Multisync monitors like Microvitek. And HAM8 images looked quite nice. We had overscan, super-hires screenmodes...

Lo-res scrolling was smoother on AGA thanks to its quarter-pixel scrolling.

Quote:

640x480 in 256 colours (or HAM8) on AGA is a slower than same resolution on SVGA.

That depends on what you are doing and the buses used. Have you ever used SVGA with an ISA slot? It was much slower than AGA. And there were quite a lot 386/486 using ISA slots.

Quote:

AGA was still nice GFX for low-end models (A1200) - comparable with 256 kB SVGA cards of that time (1992).

I'm sorry but 256KB VGA images weren't hi-colour like AGA, 256KB SVGA usually lacked blitter support, programable resolutions, genlock ability...

_________________
The only spanish amiga news web page/club: CUAZ

@Rudei

The first time you use an Amiga (in my case, an A500, a lifetime ago, first game..."Persian Gulf Inferno"!!!!) is in fact memorable.
Or the first time you get your hands on an OS4-powered A1...

But...

...for me, "the" Amiga was the A1200.

@trans

Quote:

trans wrote: SVGA wasn't really affordable until the mid 90s....

For a game system (and home computer) a GFX with 8 bit 320x240 would have been enough. A TV-Set as monitor replacement, was absolute necessary, a fast 320x200x8 bit GFX (chunky mode) 2MB ChipRAM and 1-2 MB FastRAM with a 68LC20 would not have been so much more expensive.

Of course A4000 desktop users would have liked something else, maybe there should have been a bigger difference between the chip set of an 1990 Amiga home-/game system and a 1990 Amiga Workstation/ PC. AGA like we know it was just an expansion of ECS, Amiga would have needed something else to survive and it would have needed it earlier.

_________________
AmigaONE. Haha. Just because you can put label on it does not make it Amiga.

I borrowed this comments from here (#27 & #28):
http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=38873&forum=2&start=20&order=0

@trans

Quote:

Commodore had this great product in the CD32, It could have easily have been the next "NES" or "Sega" of the day

Nope. It was neither a great product nor could it have been the next "(S)NES or Sega of its time. The reasons for that are various. First and foremost, it was totaly underpowered.
No, not even a faster CPU or more ram would have helped here, the chipset simply was too outdated allready.
Face it, CD32 was weak, even compared to consoles which just apeared few months later, like 3DO or Atari's Jaguar. (If you don' t believe me, just have a blast from the past, you will notice that even the machine which later became N64 is mentioned...).And if this wasn`t enough, both where simply blown away from Sony's Playstation which hit the streets about a year later or so (and unfortunatelly gave Sega a kick in the butt from which they never fully recovered, at least as a hardware manufactor)

To sum it up, even *if* commodore would have been healthy enough, and if enough CD32 where produced, the machine would have been finally wiped from the market at the end of 1994/95

The other major Problem was Software. IIRC only Jaguar had fewer software titles, which otoh used the machines abilities. CD 32 games library mainly consist of older Amiga (often even ECS!) conversions. Not very appealing, if you own them for your desktop Amiga allready.

So no, a judges decission was the least problem commodore had to face back the days, incompetence within the board of directors was probably a more serious problem.

That said, I *like* my CD32 as much as I like the other 21 consoles I have arround. Just because it wasn't the greatest piece of hardware back the days,it doesn't mean that you can't have fun with it ;)

The Amiga CD32 was certainly not ahead for its time but it was an interesting system anyway, with great potential overall.

From the software side, unfortunately it was never pushed to its limits and never had real "killer" applications.

From the hardware side, I recall its motherboard being also used for multimedia kiosks and even arcade like game projects.

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

@Crumb

Quote:

Ever heard of AGA 1024x768 screenmodes?

Interlaced 50 Hz? No thanks.

Quote:

That depends on what you are doing and the buses used.

Sure.

Quote:

I'm sorry but 256KB VGA images weren't hi-colour like AGA, 256KB SVGA usually lacked blitter support, programable resolutions, genlock ability...

Yes, AGA had its advantages (in cases you mentioned). However, SVGA was in 1992 better solution for the end user in most cases. You can have 800x600 in 16 colours non-laced with 256 kB SVGA and chunky modes for 3D games - try that with AGA.


As I wrote, I like my AGA based computer more than my 486SX notebook or PowerBook 165. AGA was nice solution for low-end model (A1200), but it was really unsuitable for any highend computer.

@pavlor
But I believe your're mixing the 1200 with the CD32 (of which i'm a proud owner!! ).
The first is a computer, and as such it should have been more viable as a professional machine. When it came out I wondered if it would be worth it to get an AGA Amiga but then again, I got a 68040 from GVP and hi-res 24Bit non intaralced graphics thanks to a Picasso II.

On the other hand, 320x2xx 2D games were still the bulk of gaming until 1996 (that year 2D and 3D games were still published in the same numbers if you count the Japanese market and Arcade market), so a powerful 2D machine in 1992 made sense (with good games that is!!).

What we needed was that ALL the best western developers would take the plunge, and create a ton of top quality western developed 2D games on it.

Think of The Bitmap Brothers, Rare, Reflection, DMA Design, Thalion (people from the last three groups were hired by Sony eventually) and even Lucas Arts with his adventures line up (although not from Lucas, I had the time of my life with Simon the Sorcerer on the CD32).

Last edited by DAX on 17-Mar-2011 at 10:36 AM.

_________________
SamFlex Complete 800Mhz System + AmigaOS 4.1 Update 4
Amiga 2000 DKB 2MB ChipRam GVP G-Force040 Picasso 2 OS3.9 BB2
AmigaCD 32

@DAX

Quote:

On the other hand, 320x2xx 2D games were still the bulk of gaming until 1996 (that year 2D and 3D games were still published in the same numbers if you count the Japanese market and Arcade market), so a powerful 2D machine in 1992 made sense (with good games that is!!).

What about games like DOOM, Ultima Underworld, Arena, flight and other simulators? At that time (1992) even simple support for 3D (eg. chunky modes) was neccessary for gaming machines. Jay Miner knew this already in 1989.