@Heimdall

Quote:

I don't have a native PowerPC build yet,

It does not need to be, but you need to make sure it does not cash. So often bugs exist in 680x0 that does not show up unless you run it on more restricted system.

AmigaOS4.x will convert 680x0 into JIT cache, as long as game respect bytes per row, support different RGB formats, and or bitmap formats, it should work. as long stick with high level API’s like AHI, picasso96 or cyber graphics. as long as you read keyboard from a window event, and you read the joystick from lowelevel.library

in any case games do not sell themselves.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 13-Feb-2025 at 09:16 PM.

_________________
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/
Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS

MagicSN Quote:

My impressions from what I sold on recent games (and what I got as info from other sources) is: a) Biggest market is 68030 50 MHz AGA systems

What percentage do you think is ARM in-order Cortex-A53 emulation of the 68k Amiga which can emulate up to about a 68030@50MHz with AGA?

MagicSN Quote:

b) Second would be 68040

What percentage do you think is WinUAE and OoO ARM emulation of the 68k Amiga (e.g. RPi 4 and 5)?

MagicSN Quote:

c) After that probably (not sure) 060+Vampire (Vampire probably biggest)

I believe there are more 68060 accelerated Amigas but the hardware is divided by AGA, RTG and Warp3D capabilities, a wider range of clock speeds and memory bandwidths and now 68060s without a FPU and maybe even MMU. Also, some 68060 users are not into gaming. Most newer Vamp/AC customers get more standard hardware including AGA, RTG and limited 3D support. They are more likely to be into old school 68k gaming and demos as SAGA is an enhanced chipset which moves the 68k Amiga forward with the Amiga chipset in FPGA being less of a limitation than the CPU and 3D GPU cores in FPGA.

MagicSN Quote:

d) Then PiStorm (though PiStorm market is rising)

The PiStorm category could be combined with your b above but Emu68 gives more CPU performance with OCS/ECS/ZorroII and to a lesser extent AGA/ZorroIII bottlenecks. Maybe those bottlenecks will be reduced by moving more computing to the more modern ARM side and using the 68k Amiga hardware less. Would it not be easier to just replace the 68k Amiga with a RPi if the the 68k Amiga hardware is not being used anymore?

MagicSN Quote:

e) After that OS4 f) WarpOS last, though especially in Poland and Germany there are quite some users of it

What about MorphOS? Now that Ben is gone is it ok for Hyperion to sell into the MorphOS market or is there another puppeteer pulling the strings behind the curtain and sabotaging Amiga market game sales?

MagicSN Quote:

As to highend titles it also would help to have a 3D Solution for PiStorm. Don't want to start all the discussion again, but not trying to hinder things here would definitely help.

Germans are sometimes too indirect and diplomatic. US Americans would just say, "Why do you continue to sabotage retro 68k Amiga development which decreases all Amiga game development/sales and PiStorm sales which A-EonKit sells?" Does low end RPi based integrated 3D hardware with an old and practically deprecated API threaten PPC desktop big box hardware using discreet 3D cards and a newer API? Is somebody protecting obsolete hardware at the expense of the Amiga market and even their partners in crime, I mean business partners?

Last edited by matthey on 13-Feb-2025 at 09:13 PM.
Last edited by matthey on 13-Feb-2025 at 09:02 PM.

@matthey

MorphOS support WarpOS binaries, and can also run the 680x0 version.

_________________
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/
Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS

@matthey

>What percentage do you think is ARM in-order Cortex-A53 emulation of the 68k Amiga which can >emulate up to about a 68030@50MHz with AGA?

I am not talking about "which system can run at least 030 speed" here, I am talking which sort of system most people are having. A A53-based system is faster than a 030, it could do more highend games. On the other hand purely from financial reasoning it makes sense to do games which run on a real 030 (which cannot do faster) - as a lot of these systems still exist.

>What percentage do you think is WinUAE and OoO ARM emulation of the 68k Amiga (e.g. RPi 4 and >5)?

I have to admit this is pretty unknown, I have no numbers here. I got myselves a Pi5 with AmiKit software actually and I really like that system. Still I doubt that this is much of a market. Of course - if something runs on a PiStorm4 it will run on a Pi5+AmiKit (or something similar) as well. I am also testing my games on UAE and QEmu though. Myselves, actually. I actually use QEmu myselves a lot (though my main Amiga is my x1000).


>I believe there are more 68060 accelerated Amigas but the hardware is divided by AGA, RTG and >Warp3D capabilities, a wider range of clock speeds and memory bandwidths and now 68060s >without a FPU and maybe even MMU. Also, some 68060 users are not into gaming. Most newer

Agreed.

>The PiStorm category could be combined with your b above but Emu68 gives more CPU

No, it cannot as the PiStorm category gives options for games which require more performance. Especially if games are made which support not only PiStorm, but let's say PiStorm+OS4 or PiStorm+Vampire+OS4. Of course games for lower targets will bring more sold copies, still sometimes I like to do something high end, and so it is important to keep those categories separate.

>performance with OCS/ECS/ZorroII and to a lesser extent AGA/ZorroIII bottlenecks. Maybe those >bottlenecks will be reduced by moving more computing to the more modern ARM side and using >the 68k Amiga hardware less. Would it not be easier to just replace the 68k Amiga with a RPi if >the the 68k Amiga hardware is not being used anymore?

I think for the PiStorm people it matters that this is still an A1200. Else they could have got a Pi5. Which would be faster. Instead they choose a A1200+Pi4 (actually even if you already got a A1200 more expensive).

>What about MorphOS? Now that Ben is gone is it ok for Hyperion to sell into the MorphOS >market or is there another puppeteer pulling the strings behind the curtain and sabotaging >Amiga market game sales?

At least for commercial game ports irrelevant, as it would mean you pay twice the licence cost. And with MorphOS not really being big (I would say smaller market than OS4, how much smaller or if they are similar in size is not that relevant). Still I will support it in the form of WarpOS versions (WarpOS is AmigaOS 3.x so would be covered by a licence for AmigaOS). BTW with agreement from Ben Hermans He was well aware that I even tested the WOS Version of G17 on pure MOS hardware (Apple Mini thingy). Well, not myselves, two of my Betatesters did the MOS test of the WOS versions.

Asides from that I am no friend of MorphOS. But I definitely will go sure that my WOS versions will run on MorphOS.

BTW: First time I see Germans being said indirect and diplomatic. But I guess I had my share of being too direct in the past But I do not say you are wrong with what you said there... definitely not! Obviously I see the part about PowerPC a bit different

MagicSN

Last edited by MagicSN on 14-Feb-2025 at 10:48 AM.

@matthey

Quote:

What percentage do you think is ARM in-order Cortex-A53 emulation of the 68k Amiga which can emulate up to about a 68030@50MHz with AGA?

For Cortex A53-based SoCs, ARM's Amiga emulators at this time are faster than 68030 @ 50Mhz.

A600GS has Allwinner H618 SoC which includes quad-core Cortex A53 and a larger 1MB L2 cache. H618's larger L2 cache helps with emulation performance.

TheA500mini has Allwinner H6 SoC which includes quad-core Cortex A53 and 512KB L2 cache.

RPI 3A+ includes quad-core Cortex A53 and 512KB L2 cache.


Quote:

The PiStorm category could be combined with your b above but Emu68 gives more CPU performance with OCS/ECS/ZorroII and to a lesser extent AGA/ZorroIII bottlenecks. Maybe those bottlenecks will be reduced by moving more computing to the more modern ARM side and using the 68k Amiga hardware less. Would it not be easier to just replace the 68k Amiga with a RPi if the the 68k Amiga hardware is not being used anymore?

For the given ARM CPU generation, Emu68 is the fastest 68K CPU emulator for AArch64 since it doesn't emulate Commodore's Amiga hardware.

Emu68 vs Amiberry is similar to faster Amithlon-JIT vs slower UAE-JIT.

Emu68's difference from Amithlon is Emu68's turtle mode features are friendly for retro 68K Amiga games.

_________________
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68)
Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@Hammer

I am still impressed though how fast Amiberry runs on Pi5. Though I guess if an option for Emu68 on Pi5 would be available (I am told there might be some new hardware which enables this option MAYBE in the future ??? Something with a different connector than what PiStorm currently does which would defeat the latency problem ????).

Currently Heretic 2 640x480 runs around 25-30 fps on Pi CM4 with PiStorm (Emu68). That would be a 2.2 GHz overclocking. On a (as well slightly overclocked) Pi5 with Amiberry I get 56 fps for the same.

MagicSN

I'm glad I started this thread. I won't be able to respond in detail today as last two days I have been traveling for work but I certainly have a lot to think about during my today's 750 km drive.

The 030 50 MHz target brings a lot of work and compromises.

Also, since the 040+060 sales are likely not huge, perhaps I should forget about implementing C2P for now and just focus on finishing the game for Vampires, winuae and pistorm.

The risk of missing the June release date would rise exponentially once I burn 2-3 weeks on C2P and the inferior color depth.



And, even if I somehow pull it off and it'll run stable on 030, there still will be hundreds of people b*tching that it doesn't run 120 fps on their next gen OCS, of course...

@Heimdall

If you are already targeting PiStorm what about adding OS4 and WarpOS also as targets (if you need compilers I could provide those). Similar or faster performance.

If you are interested I could also give access to my dynamic library which I did for such stuff, basically it offers functions for screen refresh, events and sound (internally using SDL1 but as it is in a dynamic library it can be used even for commercial stuff). It supports both graphics boards and c2p. And for WarpOS I also have a version (for OS4 I have it statically linked, so in source code).

And yes, it is sort of a glorified SDL wrapper, still it is useful for commercial games, as it avoids problems with SDL Licence (for Screen refresh of course it does direct Video RAM Access, for optimal speed). Used in Heretic 2 and Gorky 17 for example.

And yes, I know the problems you describe regarding 030. Have been in the same problems with "Secret Project #1" where in the end I gave up on 030 support (it requires 40 MHz 040 as minimum now, might actually run on some 25 or 33 MHz 040 if it is a really fast graphics board - 25 MHz 040 + CybervisionPPC is playable for example, but of course people with such a system could run WarpOS or OS4 version of the game ^^).

Steffen

@Heimdall

A 030/50 is nearly as fast as a 040/25

But don't look to much at the CPU, what GFX is planned?

ECS, AGA, RTG ? How much colors?

16 colors are faster than 256 colors, what kind of 3D?

Wire frames, simple flat shading, pattern matching?

3D Flat shading, could be seen on many early flight simulators,
https://youtu.be/oHsUbGTIXyE?t=428

or games with mazes
https://youtu.be/PSzcoG7k2FI?t=111

---
Libraries could help you, SDL may works on RTG but will not be optimized for AGA, it could help if your game should be PC compatible.

@MagicSN

Quote:

I am still impressed though how fast Amiberry runs on Pi5. Though I guess if an option for Emu68 on Pi5 would be available (I am told there might be some new hardware which enables this option MAYBE in the future ??? Something with a different connector than what PiStorm currently does which would defeat the latency problem ????).

RPi 5's GPIO is connected via RP1 chip on a PCIe bus with more than twice the latency.

It's RPi's self-interest to shift GPIO to the RPi chip. A possible dumping of Broadcom middlemen in the future.

The latency of PCIe 5.0 varies depending on multiple factors, including network connectivity, attached devices and workloads. But it's safe to assume an average latency of around 100 nanoseconds (ns) — roughly 50% less than PCIe 4.0.

PCIe 4.0 has a significantly lower latency than PCIe 3.0, with a latency reduction of approximately 75-80% for single-lane transfers and 80-85% for dual-lane transfers

PCIe 3.0 single lane latency is about 250-300 ns (nanoseconds). PCIe 3.0 dual-lane transfer, the latency is approximately 125-150 ns.

Amiga 500's Chip RAM has about 260 ns read/write latency.
Amiga 1200's Chip RAM has about 140-160 ns read/write latency.

PCIe is biased for burst transfers due to the nature of modern PC GPU or packet-based NIC cards. PCIe is not ideal as CPU to CPU link.

PCIe has a road map for lowering latency.

RPi company size is reaching to a point that they might go direct to ARM instead of relying on middleman Broadcom. RPi is a minority-owned by ARM.

Quote:

Currently Heretic 2 640x480 runs around 25-30 fps on Pi CM4 with PiStorm (Emu68). That would be a 2.2 GHz overclocking. On a (as well as slightly overclocked) Pi5 with Amiberry I get 56 fps for the same.

There's a difference with Pi's ARM CPU cores i.e. A72 vs A76 (stock @ 2.4Ghz)

For example
RPi 5's Cortex A76 cache
- 64 KB instruction L1 cache per core,
- 64 KB data L1 cache per core,
- 512 KB L2 cache per core,
- 2 MB shared L3 cache.

RPi 4's Cortex A72 cache
- 48 KB instruction L1 cache per core,
- 32 KB data L1 cache per core,
- 1 MB shared L2 cache.

Cortex A76 transitions into a big ARM CPU core e.g. A78 and X1.

The main RPi 5's weakness is the Broadcom iGPU.

Last edited by Hammer on 15-Feb-2025 at 12:28 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 15-Feb-2025 at 12:27 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 15-Feb-2025 at 12:20 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 15-Feb-2025 at 12:17 AM.

_________________
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32/RPi CM4/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, ECS, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 4B/Emu68)
Ryzen 9 7950X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB

@Heimdall

Quote:

Right now, however, it's a higher priority to get a C2P and 8-bit color modes working for the 040-060, because for now it's running just at 24-bit color depth on Amiga (well, to be exact - V4SA as that's the only HW I have).

Feel free to try my c2p.library available on Aminet under MIT license: http://aminet.net/package/dev/misc/c2plib

@Heimdall

No need for C2P, just target… eh, re-targetable graphics, if it then works an A2000 with 030 board and a old picasso II, great. But if it doesn’t, no big deal.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@g.bude

Have you considered using your library to implement a real P96 driver for native chipset? (ThoR’s “Native� isn’t really that, it just loads rtg.library (iirc) which moves blitting from chipset to cpu.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@kolla

I'm sorry, this requirement is out of target of c2p.library
c2p.library is dedicated only to classic Amiga chipset.

I'm back home, I'll try to respond as much as possible, but this is a way more complex situation than I imagined 2 days ago! I'm really glad I started the thread!

@MagicSN

Quote:

MagicSN wrote: @Heimdall If you are already targeting PiStorm what about adding OS4 and WarpOS also as targets (if you need compilers I could provide those). Similar or faster performance.

Well, when I say target, I mean a HW target, not a compile target. Game is written in Assembler (I'm using vasm). Well, Higgs - which is a high-level language I designed myself that translates all high-level language commands into ASM, feeding it directly into vasm.

Only about 2 weeks ago, on this very forum, I found out the basic stuff about PPC/MorphOS, so I have literally zero idea about how to get things running there.
But, it's supposedly still an Amiga ecosystem, so in theory, my RTG code should work there.

If I learned PowerPC assembly, I could write a new backend for my Higgs compiler and get a native PPC code. This shouldn't be a huge endeavor, because I already have a RISC backend for the Jaguar's DSP and GPU. I'd just need to learn new syntax and implement the PPC's instruction set as a layer above the RISC component in Higgs (that is written in C#, so features are quick to add, test and debug).

I'm really excited about PPC because coming from Jaguar's 26.6 MHz GPU, these puppies are order of magnitude faster ! So yeah, I'd love to see what they can do!

Quote:

If you are interested I could also give access to my dynamic library which I did for such stuff, basically it offers functions for screen refresh, events and sound (internally using SDL1 but as it is in a dynamic library it can be used even for commercial stuff). It supports both graphics boards and c2p. And for WarpOS I also have a version (for OS4 I have it statically linked, so in source code). And yes, it is sort of a glorified SDL wrapper, still it is useful for commercial games, as it avoids problems with SDL Licence (for Screen refresh of course it does direct Video RAM Access, for optimal speed). Used in Heretic 2 and Gorky 17 for example.

That sounds intriguing. Do I interpret it correctly that you have a start-up/initialization code that will work across multiple OS, regardless of it has RTG ? Including PowerPC HW ? Wow, that must have taken ages to test, debug and patch. I got stuck on library differences just on Vampire alone, let alone 040/060 OS!

I'd be grateful if we could have a thread where you'd share the experience with troubleshooting all the library differences across multiple categories of HW. Amiga landscape is incredibly fragmented, HW/OS - wise. Did you use logging all OS calls into a log file, or you have multiple codepaths when certain library doesn't initialize (for example timer or input libraries).
A notorious example for my situation is timer.device library. I got it working just fine on WinUAE and my V4SA, but few other people's machines wouldn't initialize it. In the end I had to recreate all the timing code using a different OS library for timing (lowlevel.library, IIRC).

Quote:

And yes, I know the problems you describe regarding 030. Have been in the same problems with "Secret Project #1" where in the end I gave up on 030 support (it requires 40 MHz 040 as minimum now, might actually run on some 25 or 33 MHz 040 if it is a really fast graphics board - 25 MHz 040 + CybervisionPPC is playable for example, but of course people with such a system could run WarpOS or OS4 version of the game ^^).

I imagine. My main 3D mesh is 546 triangles. I can't expect 030 to handle that kind of polycount in a reasonable framerate, let alone the rest of the game. Plus, the C2P would have to be tailored for 030, I'd likely have to do 2x1/1x2 approach and implement some sort of HUD covering half of screen and definitely LOD system (which I have in the engine already, just needs to be reintegrated because I recently took it out).
Not a question of 2-3 weeks, for sure...

@OneTimer1

Quote:

OneTimer1 wrote: @Heimdall A 030/50 is nearly as fast as a 040/25 But don't look to much at the CPU, what GFX is planned? ECS, AGA, RTG ? How much colors? 16 colors are faster than 256 colors, what kind of 3D? Wire frames, simple flat shading, pattern matching? 3D Flat shading, could be seen on many early flight simulators, https://youtu.be/oHsUbGTIXyE?t=428 --- Libraries could help you, SDL may works on RTG but will not be optimized for AGA, it could help if your game should be PC compatible.

It's a SW rasterizer using RTG (CGX). I'm only using RTG to get pointer to the FrameBuffer (no drawing via RTG).
It's inspired by StunRunner, so it's a fast-paced racer, but it has a lot of RPG features and rouge-like replayability (as that's what I like).

All code is 100% written by me in Asm (Higgs), I'm not using any external library (only OS libraries). Initially, I got some CGX video mode code sample from Gunnar, but I rewrote that initialization code long time ago, as I needed to have some console output in case it fails on end user's HW.

Since the only HW I have at home is Vampire V4SA, it's running at 24-bit - which is the primary reason for C2P on 040/060, as I imagine there's very few systems that have some RTG board with 24bit support.

Here's 3 screenshots:




Looks, like the forum doesn't link the imgur screenshots. Here's the links:
https://imgur.com/eTyjAf5
https://imgur.com/LPiFzl1
https://imgur.com/Ovk1fy8

It took me a looong time to create that 3D mesh of main ship. It's 546 triangles. That's unreasonably high for 030.
The 24-bit shading is not the only codepath, I have both 8-bit and 16-bit (RGB: 5-6-5) codepaths from Jaguar. I just can't test them under RTG because there is no direct 16-bit support and I found out I'll have to rewrite the CGX init code significantly (it's a different init approach - no a big deal. but about a day of work). But it's probably wiser to skip 16-bit altogether and just got for C2P.

PiStorm systems via Emu68 should have no problem with this, though as they have plenty CPU power and bandwidth.

@agami

Quote:

agami wrote: While many of these people will shell out hundreds of dollars to extend the life of their Amiga systems, they'll not just throw $15-$30 at "NEW" Amiga games. Your success at reaching and even exceeding 500 units would largely depend on the price/quality of the game. Hell, if it's good enough you could sell 500 to just the Apollo 080 market.

Yeah, I realize I made a mistake in my assumption that if you spend $500 on a HW you'll spend fraction of that on a new game. Oh, well.

Quote:

agami wrote: If I take myself as an example: I've seen some of these "NEW" Amiga games over the past couple years, and not to diminish the work that goes into developing a game for the Amiga, but all I see is old crap with a new skin, and often an obvious amateur look and feel. My internal monologue asks why should I pay for a crappy rip-off of Superfrog, when I can just play the Superfrog I already have? The NEW game could be a FREE Aminet download, but if it is just a rehash I still wouldn't waste what little spare time I have to download, install, and play.

I hear you, but the games I am creating do not even exist on the system. There's no 5 clones of Stunrunner or Star Wars 32X.

The Formula racing game that I spent 2 months creating GearBox physics for and that has OutRun-style terrain/road stripes - but in 3D - that does not exist on Amiga. It's a very different feel than standard 2D Outrun road and it scales phenomenally with higher resolutions - which makes it a perfect candidate for Vampires, PPC, WinUAE and Pistorm.

I really, really enjoy playing it on WinUAE at 1920x1080 on my 48" LG OLED TV. The flatshading looks great. It's sharp, there's no pixelation and you can have a fantastic draw distance. Features that never existed on Amiga before.

Unlike the grainy ultra-low res affine texturing of PS1-era, this kind of gfx scales very well and is not disturbing for the eye or the brain.

Quote:

agami wrote: Ultimately, you are not contending with people's discretionary income, you're contending with their available time. With so many options for entertainment, you need to give 500+ Amiga gamers the reason to not go for one of those other options.

I can relate very well about that point.
I recently crossed 500 games in my library on XBOX. I ran less than a 100 and I regularly play maybe a dozen or two (that's barely 5% of the library). My Steam library - it's even more ridiculous.

Even though I'm currently coding 75% full-time, I do not reserve more than 1 hour each day to play through the backlog. I play a lot racing games to get a feel for how they do physics, though...

@saimo

Quote:

saimo wrote: @Heimdall The Amiga market is simply too small to make any significant money, let alone making a living out of games. Don't be fooled by the numbers of users in this or that forum/social/whatever. Amiga games sell by the hundreds - even the successful ones and even those that come in a physical package (which sell a lot). On top of that, your target machine reduces the number of potential buyers. If you're in first and foremost for fun, personal satisfaction, etc., go for it. Otherwise, you'd better target other platforms. Managing to sell 500 digital copies in the range of $15-$30 for 68040+ machines is not realistic in my opinion: you'd need to have a real killer game and/or build an incredibly successful hype; not to mention that you'd have to manage to make such a masterpiece in a time frame which is short relatively to the earnings - maths say that even if you made $30*500 = $15000 gross, once you deduct taxes and divide by the number of months of work, the resulting figure wouldn't be that high. For reference, my game SkillGrid (which is for all AGA Amigas) sold 140 copies on itch.io, for a gross amount of 1152 USD, and some 120 physical copies, which earned me about 5 GBP gross per copy - you're looking at about 1800 USD before the itch.io cut and fees, and taxes. There have been more successful games, but all the figures I've seen are all of the same magnitude.

Thank you for sharing the sales stats. I truly appreciate that, sir !

I'm obviously in it for the satisfaction, as I've been self-funding it fully.

But, it'd be real nice if I could continue doing this full-time and release a new game every 4-6 months. One can dream

Although I'm all in favor for 030/040/060/PPC optimized software, for €30 I expect my software to be shipped on a factory pressed CD in a glossy, sturdy box with a thick manual. Oh, and I do expect a proper $VER: version string, full RTG/AHI-support, an Installer script and a full set of icons, too.

It's all in the details.

_________________
That'll Put Marzipan In Your Pie Plate, Bingo
💻 Pro-Amiga, 🌍 Pro-Globalism, 🍅 Pro-Vegan, 🛦 Pro-NATO & 🇪🇺 Pro-Joint EU Defense Intervention Initiative

@Petah

Quote:

Petah wrote: Although I'm all in favor for 030/040/060/PPC optimized software, for €30 I expect my software to be shipped on a factory pressed CD in a glossy, sturdy box with a thick manual. Oh, and I do expect a proper $VER: version string, full RTG/AHI-support, an Installer script and a full set of icons, too. It's all in the details.

$30 in 2024 is equal to $13 in 1992 (A1200 release date)

Is the list of things above what you got back in 1992 for $13 ?

Is that list something that is currently considered a release standard ? I'm not being sarcastic, I have no idea.



Speaking of, this is a great reminder. The budget games prices of '90s. Does anyone have scans of magazines showing what kind of quality could have been acquired for $10-$13 in that era ?


Also, it's very unreasonable to expect the same level of features in the market that is size of what it used to be back then*


*That excludes people who currently burn money into physical box releases just to say that they've done it (for the sake of the statement and because it's a hobby for them). Perhaps they skewed the current market (happened in other retro segments, for sure)...