home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: clover.cleaf.com!not-for-mail
- From: chall@clover.cleaf.com (Chris Hall)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc
- Subject: Re: AT UK redundancies
- Date: 24 Jan 1996 08:15:06 GMT
- Message-ID: <4e4pqa$eaa@alterdial.UU.NET>
- References: <wfblanDLBHAo.4Mz@netcom.com> <E7E3C401@cu-amiga.demon.co.uk> <4dns2o$ovu@alterdial.uu.net> <4e2q5gINN94i@bhars12c.bnr.co.uk>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: clover.cleaf.com
- X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 941109BETA PL0]
-
- Paul M Venkatesh (pmv@bnr.co.uk) wrote:
-
- : I agree with the sentiments but it is a bit harsh. I would advocate reducing
- : the rating of a non-hard disk installable game by 20+% depending on the
- : amount of disk swapping/waiting required. Why all these Amiga magazines
- : which are supposed to be advocating the serious use of Amigas don't take a
- : stand on this issue to try and bring a lot of the games publishers into the
- : 90's, and to encourage the readers to upgrade, I don't know.
-
- They need to be a bit harsh with their ratings of games because it's
- going to take that to get some of the game companies to realise that they
- need to make their games for all Amigas, not just PAL 1200s with no hard
- drive or fast ram. On top of the other game rating criteria, they should
- do hard drive installability (20%, with given 20% for CD games), cross
- model usability (20%), and PAL/NTSC/DBL/GFX card detection/support (10%).
- With games that support those, that would have at least a 50% rating. I
- would bet that many people would buy games based on those three rating
- criteria.
-
-
-
- Chris Hall
-
-