Why did you NOT upgrade to a CPC in the 80s?

[XTM]

Hi guys,

long post alert. Here goes ...

I spend a lot of time watching videos on YouTube and also enjoy reading the comments. In the last couple of months, I've noticed a certain French CPC user who leaves a lot of comments on Speccy-related videos. He appears to be quite annoyed at the fact that the CPC often is overlooked/not even considered in comparisons, as for example when a video compares ZX and C64 versions of games. On multiple occasions, he expressed how he is baffled at how people in the UK worship the "graphically challenged" Spectrum and why they didn't abandon it in favour of the later British-made success, the CPC, once that appeared on the market.

Of course, there is no shortage of other people who will make all kinds of negative comments towards the Speccy or its games, but this guy is special as you will find his comments under dozens of Speccy videos. But still, he asks valid questions. Let's see if we find some answers.

Have some quotes, I'll put them in spoilers:

Spoiler

No offence to anyone, but these superlatives laid out on top of such dire graphics always make me shake my head in incredulity. Boy, are the rose-tinted glasses thick when it comes to the Spectrum ! I want to send you all "Specsavers for Speccy fans" vouchers
Okay, the C64 was expensive and the Speccy might have been a decent choice until about 1984. That's when the Amstrad CPC was released and Britain could finally pride itself on an 8-bit micro playing in the same league as the Commodore (each with different strengths and weaknesses)
The Amstrad was commercially successful too : it sold a healthy 3 million units in 6 years vs the Spectrum's 5 million in 10 years.
So it's really beyond me why modern retrogaming coverage from the UK is so disproportionately skewed towards the Spectrum when its conversions are always the worst of the three to look at, by far, and the 48K doesn't even have proper music !

Spoiler

The extent of my Spectrum knowledge in the 80s was some drab screenshots on the back of game boxes, and feeling sorry for the owners I never met.
Where I grew up you either got a 464, or a colour 6128 if your parents were rich. One kid had a C64 and showed me Arkanoid. I was impressed at the music and the fact it kept going while loading, but this guy was the odd one out and wished he had a CPC.
I carry no beef from the 80s against the Speccy simply because it just wasn't in the picture.
Only in the Internet era did I come to appreciate its cult status in Britain and wanted to find out what the fuss was all about. I went to YouTube with an open mind, and as it turned out: the C64, yeah sure, definitely ! The Spectrum ? A whole lot of nothing. Hype and superlatives for an embarrassingly inferior older sibling to the CPC.

Spoiler

Thanks for putting this together, I can't decide if it was more of an enjoyable or infuriating watch.
I'll summarise the 53 minutes. Each match is either :
- Both versions just as fast, play just as well, but CPC graphics wipe the floor with the Spectrum : IT'S A DRAW, people (because "good job given Spectrum limitations") !
- CPC version has the TINIEST hint of being slower (no matter how much better it looks or sounds), or has the misfortune of being a Speccy port : SPECTRUM WINS !

I mean the leniency is almost comically one-sided ! It's almost as if graphics have no weight at all.
With the same reasoning you could claim the Atari ST is the same or better as the Amiga (its 68K is clocked slightly higher and some games are ports), but thankfully no Brit in their right mind would say that. So why do you guys never seem to be able to take off the nostalgia goggles when it comes to the ZX Spectrum ? It's a mystery to me, and it makes me want to send you Specsavers vouchers.

Particularly egregious examples : Arkanoid (Spectrum looks like an Atari 2600 era breakout, Amstrad like a proper arcade conversion), Operation Wolf (same gameplay/speed, but Spectrum is monochrome, Amstrad almost looks like a 16-bit port), Rainbow Islands (same gameplay/speed, but Spectrum has MONOCHROME RAINBOWS FFS ! )

So yeah, I don't know, are you worried to tell it like it is to Spectrum viewers ? I just don't get it !

As I said, there are many more comments like this by him on other videos, but I can't be arsed to search them all out, these will have to suffice. The 3rd/last spoiler was his comment from this YouTube video by the Classic Replay channel, called ZX Spectrum Vs Amstrad CPC (I chose not to embed it to make this post not even more cluttered).
------------------------------------------------------------- ---- --- -- - - - -

So ... why did we all not buy a CPC once it was released then (otherwise most of us wouldn't be on this forum)? I mean, we all must have been blind not to see it's better graphical capabilities, it should have been a no-brainer, right? Why play this colour clashing trash at 256x192 with 15 colours on a 32x24 attribute grid, when you could have 640x200 (2 colours), 320x200 (4 colours) or 160x200 (16 colours), and even higher resolutions with overscan, and also more colours on-screen than the 2/4/16 listed by means of palette changes during the frame, all with no colour clash and from a palette of 27 colours? Plus hardware scrolling. And you UK peeps should have been proud to buy another domestic machine too. So why? Why did this big jump to the superior platform not occur in the UK?

(To be honest, I can imagine one reason why he is asking this. I'd imagine if most people had switched to the CPC pretty pronto, say in 1984/1985, the CPC would have been spared a lot of the Speccy ports, as it probably would have become the lead platform for new games. I guess this would have resulted in less overall jerky low-framerate games on the CPC, which the Speccy ports certainly very often were, especially if the Speccy original that was ported from wasn't very smooth to begin with.)

Your personal views will be very interesting to read. I had considered making this a poll, but wasn't sure what options I should offer ...

[Waldroid]

I remember being very impressed with the CPC 6128 when it came out, but by that point I'd already invested a lot in upgrading my Spectrum.

Also, the Atari ST came out at about the same time as the 6128, so that became my vision of the future...

[spider]

To be 100% direct, the block rectangular pixels did not inspire that much.

I'm not sure if the word is "upgrade" here, its a bit like moving sideways the same way you'd do if you went to CBM (8bit) or Acorn (8bit) ?

Yes I can see the advantage of no colour clash but in some respects it reminded me of the 'B (at say Mode2) , lovely colour choices and no clash but so blocky.

For what it is worth, I have had my (2nd) CPC464 for about 6 or 7 years. I've also contributed some 'patched with cheats enabled' games on one site for them too, as they take 'cracked' games, a few were missing.

I was and am not hugely keen on the "XP Luna" colour scheme of the keyboard however the 128 seems very dull in comparison and the 664 is a bit rare, or "lol price" when it appears.

I do like the odd blast on this machine and I have nothing against it. The tape deck is superior it seems to the Speccy's inbuilt one.


Oh the cost was too high back then too, and not enough titles were ported over it seems a few now curiously absent, but I cannot immediately think of any.

During my (to be continued honest, I've been busy) 'Across the Formats' topics covering a lot of games, the CPC versions did sometimes run slower than our Speccy version too, but not always to a degree that would make them a bad choice, it was only to be fair noticeable upon comparing all versions, and occasionally some ran a bit quicker too.

[PeterJ]

To be 100% direct, the block rectangular pixels did not inspire that much..

Me too. Square characters had a maximum of four colours (from BASIC). The BBC had the same issue. If you wanted more than four colours on screen you had to resort to the low resolution mode. Although I remember being very excited about the included screen and early games like Sorcery. We only had one TV at home.

I had also invested money on Spectrum software (and had a positive view on Sir Clive as I had owned a ZX81) and enjoyed reading the magazines.I can't imagine my parents agreeing to buy me a new computer again! If I was picking my first computer, I may well have picked an Amstrad. Based on the games and magazines (Amtix lasted for just 18 issues) support, i think I would have been eventually disappointed by that choice.

If Amstrad has squeezed more colours into that 320 x 200 mode, then combined with the excellent BASIC I think it would have been a game changer.

Finally, the view on Amstrad in the 80s wasn't very positive. They were known for cheap hi-fi systems.

[SteveSmith]

Very good question. I can only answer for myself: I never really considered it, since I'd already got the Speccy and collected some games. Why would I "start over"?

Why play this colour clashing trash at 256x192 with 15 colours on a 32x24 attribute grid, when you could have 640x200 (2 colours), 320x200 (4 colours) or 160x200 (16 colours)

Are any of those modes actually better?

[TMD2003]

On the CPC 464's launch on 11 April 1984, as a family we were all celebrating my brother's second birthday. I was four, and still enthralled with my ZX81.

Monsieur CPC-est-magnifique can draw all the conclusions he needs from that, and cry into his vin rouge if that's not enough!

[PeterJ]

I'm sure we have mentioned this chap previously. We have certainly had many similar discussions on Spectrum v Amstrad.

[1024MAK]

Okay, mega mad, of course the Atari STFM is a far better machine than an Amiga. For a start, the STFM was in my price range… (which is why I bought one, a 520 STFM with a single sided 3½” floppy).

And that’s a large part of the answer to the question, why did people not replace their Speccy with an Amstrad CPC. Money, or rather, for most, the lack of it.

My family bought a ZX Spectrum 48K rubber key for us kids for Christmas 1983. That was a very expensive present. No way would I ever have been able to persuade my parents to buy another computer, let alone a more expensive model so soon after getting a Speccy.

The Amstrad CPC464 was a late entry to the market in the U.K., that’s the other reason that it did not do so well here. Ahead of it was the ZX81, ZX Spectrum 16K and 48K, Commodore VIC-20, Commodore 64, Atari 8 bits and the Texas Instruments TI-99/4A. Not to mention the expensive Acorn BBC A and BBC B machines. And the other less well known machines such as the Dragon 32.

On top of that, the amount of software (okay, mostly games) for the Speccy had exploded before the CPC464 was launched. It took time for the software base to expand for the CPC464. Meanwhile, even more games were being released for the Speccy.

The situation was not the same in other countries. The Amstrad CPC464 was very popular in France I believe.

0:0 Z - End of Rant

Mark

[AndyC]

Are any of those modes actually better?

Well, it depends what you want to do, doesn't it? Want 80 column text? Then yes, it's better. Want to display a high Res map of the world, with individual countries coloured in so that now two touching countries are the same colour? Then yes it's better. Want to be able to scroll the screen in pixel increments without having to resort to monochrome graphics? Then yes, it's better.

Want to get high res, static images with carefully positioned colouring? Then no, probably not as good.

[Manu128k]

All right, all right... That should be in the meme thread but anyway, I think maybe he is trolling a bit. I have an irrational love for this machine, but I don't go to other system forums to tell them how wrong they are and how vast is the grandness of the Speccy

[XTM]

@Manu128k Do you mean me with "he is trolling a bit" because I made this thread, or the French guy?

By the way, I was just watching a video called "8 Games That I Think Are Better On The ZX Spectrum Than The C64!" - note: the video is from someone who grew up with a C64 ... and guess whom I found in the comments section (which was pretty civil otherwise, as most people agreed with the uploader)? Quote time in the spoiler.

Spoiler

You picked particularly bad C64 ports, but even there the Spectrum doesn't win. The best 8-bit version of every single one of these games (Chase HQ, Wec Le Mans, Target Renegade, Robocop, Batman in particular) is the Amstrad CPC port.
In fact, I can't think of any C64/Amstrad/Spectrum conversion battle where the Spectrum comes out on top. It's either Amstrad for graphics or C64 for sound/playability/arcade qualities.
Let's face it : every time Sinclair fans speak with phrases like "it just plays better" or "given the limitations of the good old Speccy", it's the nostalgia goggles doing the talk.
The Spectrum cult is an embarrassment to UK retro gaming
If you want to be proud of a British computer and not have the rest of Europe shake their heads in disbelief, consider giving the Amstrad a fair chance in these reviews

Well, there you have it, black on white. All these games are best on the CPC. I'll get the DeLorean, time to go back to 1984 so I can correct my mistake. Someone got a few quid so I can afford that Amstrad? That Plutonium is expensive, you know!

But yeah, I don't really mean to troll (though it certainly is hard to resist). This is a genuine thread, I want to hear people's opinions and why they do or don't agree with the "sentiment" laid out in the OP.

[TMD2003]

La boîte vide fait le plus de bruit.

[Matt_B]

We had a CPC in the 80s. It was definitely a far better machine for serious side of computing; programming, word processing, spreadsheets, etc.
My brother even wrote up his degree project on it. I sure as hell wasn't doing mine on the rubber key Spectrum, so I picked up an Atari ST at that point.

It was, at best, a side-grade in terms of gaming though. The machine definitely has a fair few gems, but the overriding message I got from the experience is that game quality comes down far more to developer time and talent than what the hardware is capable of.

[stupidget]

My first experience with a CPC was in ‘84 when I went around my mates house whose folks had just bought one. The only game he had was Harrier Attack, which I never really liked and I though ‘well this is all very disappointing’.

I’ve watched quite a few ChinnyVision vids on YouTube and I must admit that quite a few CPC games looked very impressive. I do get the impression that it never reached its true potential and many of the games were just ports of Speccy games, some of which were pretty poor.

With regards to us Brits having rose tinted glasses about the Speccy, well I suppose that is somewhat true, but, you could say that about much of the tech from the early 80s. For many of us the early 80s felt like we were actually living in the future. The 70s had been a period of huge industrial action and strikes, power cuts and recession. The 80s started with an explosion of new music (post punk, new wave, goth, New Romantics etc ) technology seemed to suddenly feel like sci-fi had become real with consoles like astrowars, Pac-Man and Frogger giving you an arcade machine in your house and when you then had an actual computer in your house it was a genuine feeling of amazement. For me it’s a feeling that has rarely been repeated in over 40 years.

[PeterJ]

As others have said serious software was generally better on the Amstrad. 80 columns can be very useful. Masterfile is very good, and it even has semi-relational capabilities.

[AndyC]

I do think there is some rose tinted glasses going on, across all three platforms though. I'm pretty sure if I showed my other half all three the response would be something along the lines of "What are you on about, they're all sh*t"

[Van_Dammesque]

1. More people had ZX's for you know what.
2. CPC was relatively expensive, you had to buy a monitor for it IIRC, green screen or pay £150 extra for a colour monitor (which was a TV disguised in a typical cheap Amstrad way).
3. Slow loading times IMO
4. Blocky graphics
5. Very slow and poor animation. Don't mention the scrolling.
6. Crap games as mere cheap unoptimised ports.

That'll do for now I think!

[Nitrowing]

As my 48k died, my choice was "computer" or "Yamaha RD200"

[HEXdidnt]

Mine was always a Spectrum-focussed household... at least until I got my SAM Coupé (and, later, an Amiga). I can remember my father took a very dim view of the Amstrad buyout, but he nevertheless bought a +3 when they came along. All my schoolfriends either had Spectrums or C64s, not a single one had an Amstrad. In retrospect, that may just have been for financial reasons, but it was a very even split... maybe favouring Commodore slightly.

On the flipside, there's a guy at my local computer club who owns several CPCs (though still missing one or two models from his collection), and is very vocal about their superiority to their contemporaries.

Bearing in mind that my only exposure to Amstrad games was via advertising screenshots in the Speccy magazines or reviews in the likes of C&VG, my vibe on the Amstrad was that its games either looked like garish remixes of the C64 or slower versions of the Spectrum with a splash of extra colour here and there. Years after I worked on Reckless Rufus for the Spectrum, I looked up the Amstrad version, and it's pretty awful. It should look like the C64 version, but brighter and more vibrant... but it somehow looks more blocky, despite the same screen resolution when running full colour.

I know the Amstrad is getting some amazing ports and original games now... but, back in the day, it just wasn't seen as a games machine, and it looked as though the coders of the time either didn't know how to make the best of it, or just couldn't be bothered as the market was so small.

[Daveysloan]

Back in the day it would've been a very expensive sideways move, the Speccy was already established with an impressive library of games that the Amstrad couldn't match, not to mention the faff of buying an extra monitor.

By the time the Amstrad was up & running with it's library of inferior Speccy ports the ST & Amigas were out & if you were going to upgrade to anything, it'd be them.

Besides it's only really retrospectively that hobbyists are taking full advantage of the machine's capabilities. The games where the Amstrad games were significantly better than the other 8 bit versions were few and far between.

[Matt_B]

I do think there is some rose tinted glasses going on, across all three platforms though. I'm pretty sure if I showed my other half all three the response would be something along the lines of "What are you on about, they're all sh*t"

You could probably the same for anything prior to the Xbox 360 though, at least if she's like my wife.

[1024MAK]

So, what’s next? Why did you NOT buy a Betamax or V2000 video recorder instead of a VHS in the 80s?

After all, technically both Betamax and V2000 video recorder specifications were clearly better than VHS (when first released)…

And no, I’m not actually asking for people to reply.

Mark

[Ralf]

In Poland, where I live, Amstrad CPC in the 80s was very unpopular, practically nonexisting. Maybe for 50 Zx Spectrum there was one CPC or so.
We even didn't know the name CPC, in the magazines it was just called Amstrad.

I guess it was the price. It was quite expensive and, if I remember correctly, you couldn't use TV for it and had to buy a monitor as well.

And as a gaming machine it was nothing special. Yes, some CPC games look good... on screenshots. When you actually start playing it, it
becomes a slowmotion. CPC hadn't any hardware accelaration (just like Speccy) and in its most colourful graphic mode it had to deal
with much more data than Speccy so it was slow.

Any many games were lazy Spectrum ports with 15 Spectrum colours reduced to 4 colours which looked just badly and most CPC guys hated them.

So it was sot so great as a gaming machine. In Poland, in a few cases I've heard about someone actually had CPC, it was used professionally.

[Pegaz]

A lot of valid arguments have already been given, here are some of my toughts.
I agree, that one of the main reasons for not buying a CPC machine during the 80s was the late appearance on the market and also the price.
Spectrum and C64 firmly held their positions and had a large user base, and soon after 16-bit models started to arrive, so Amstrad actually had a good success, considering all the circumstances.
Also, the whole system with the monitor initially was a good idea, but in reality, the color monitor radiated like hell and was a killer for the eyes, while gaming on the green monitor was not too much of a pleasure.
There was a TV modulator, which had to be bought separately, but it wasn't particularly good either.

In terms of hardware, it was a very capable machine, with a lot of unused potential, some quality exclusives and a lot of lazy Spectrum conversions.
Many games suffered from a lack of speed, so they ran in reduced windows, which I didnt like at all, simply, Spectrum and C64, provided a better gaming experience.
That's not to say Amstrad didn't have good games, but as someone already noted, many didn't want to start over, only to get mostly the same.
However, mode 0 with 16 colors from a palette of 27, could produce very colorful games and mode 1, with careful design, also looked really nice (eg. isometric titles, especially Head over Heels, are best of all competitors).
Today, the homebrew scene has proven that Amstrad could have much better games, but I recently read somewhere, that even now there are only a small number of people who are able to use the full potential of the 6845 CRTC chip, like works of Batman group, for example.
All in all, the Amstrad is a very substantial home computer, with a large software library, and I like it.
I had CPC 464 during 90/91 and I can understand those who think he is unfairly underrated.
In France, it became literally the national computer, and it was also very successful in Germany and elsewhere in Europe.

[SteveSmith]

I notice that OP (or rather, the French user that OP is quoting) does seem to only concentrate on the graphics of Amstrad games being better. Nowehere does he mention "gameplay", mainly because it seems they only watched the games on Youtube, and never actually played them.