Re: Rare IIgs Games

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

John Lingl <ling1984@kettering.edu> wrote:

>Space Quest III was never released for the Apple IIGS because it was
>written using a different interpreter called SCI (Sierra Creative
>Interpretter). SCI would also be used for Police Quest II, Leisure Suit
>Larry II and so on. The older games (Space Quest I, King's Quest II) used
>AGI (Adventure GAme Interpretter). SCI had much better grphics (320x200)
>but ran incredibly slow. I remmber talking to a Sierra customer rep and

That's a lame excuse.  Almost all IIGS games use 320x200 and if
the IIGS can run the HyperCard IIGS interpreter, it can run the SCI
interpreter.

>they said the only way their games would be playable is if everyone had a
>TWGS and they figured not enough did.  So it could be possible that much
>of the game is coded but never released.  (I had ordered both these games
>only to be dissapointed when it was cancelled.)

That's balony.  So many people looked at the IIGS' stock Mhz and
thought it could do nothing good, but they forget that the IIGS' CPU
does more using each Mhz than the equivalent Intel or Motorolla
CPU of the time.  For example, I have an original IBM AT with an
8Mhz '286 CPU from the 1986 era (the IIGS' era).  Although the CPU
sounds a lot faster at 8Mhz, the IBM AT was slower than the IIGS in
practice and crawled when doing graphics.  Just try to run an old
version of Windows using CGA, EGA, or Hercules adapters on such
a unit.  The IIGS could move graphics faster.  It ran faster in most
other tasks too.  Besides, the AT was loaded with wait states.

The same can be said about Motorolla based CPUs of the day.  The
IIGS and the Atari 520ST, displaying their GUIs side by side, will
not show much difference in speed at all.  The Amiga 1000, the IIGS
era Amiga, had faster graphics only because of a blitter chip, not
because of the CPU.