It's achieved most classic 8-bit computer status. Nothing else even comes close even if the specs are better in some way or another.

true, and it mindrapes this wannabe jap board and their unhealthy seething at micros on a daily (probably hourly) basis

>>11794980
I grew up with Apple computers and while I still love them, and despite the fact that they benchmarked faster than the C64 (as did the original IBMs) nothing comes close for sound, video, and games.

Look at Times Of Lore, for instance. C64 absolutely blows all the other versions of that game away. I consider it one of the finest on the platform for RPGs.

>>11794980
micro-hating weebs are out of fashion, we love the PC-88 and MSX now

>>11794980
the funny thing is that the micro owners were the biggest weebs at the time while console owners were mostly just normies

>>11795386
This except unironically
I'm too old and retarded to learn Japanese so I'm glad Basement Brothers is covering these games (especially since he actually speaks Japanese and I think he still lives in Japan)

>>11794978 (OP)
> best selling home computer of all time
so dangerously based

>>11794983
> benchmarked faster
BASIC benchmarks are worthless as actual programmers use assembly language

>>11794978 (OP)
oi me speccy! eh? Eh? EHHHH???

>>11794983
>>11795515
Didn’t Apple win benchmarks with the first Apple II model because their Basic used integers only and it was only faster because of that?

>>11794983
I grew up with C64 and C128s but I appreciate how Apple has a modern keyboard though. Makes emulation super simple. Whereas Commodore has shit shifted around and extra function buttons that are weird...
It's a shame apple sucks balls and the IIGS seems like a decent computer and included upgradeability like the apple II. The early apple was so much a mix of microcomputers and PCs that nothing else really had... but Apple being the dillweeds like MS, made shit a pain to be popular with price points, going after schools, and other scummy tactics.
I should try emulating the IIGS as well.

>>11795594
yes. what happened was jack tramiel had duped microsoft into giving commodore a perpetual license for BASIC V2 that didn't require commodore to pay royalties to microsoft. BASIC V2 was dangerously out of date even when the c64 was released but it was a bargain. BASIC V2 was so bad that it forced a generation of kids to learn assembly languages. (similar story on apple 2 as well as its BASIC variant wasn't great either). BASIC fucking sucks and using it as some kind of benchmark, when people were mainly programming in assembler, was always batshit insane.

>>11795610
the iigs is fucking amazing, one of the best computers apple ever made, and apple still squandered it because apple was run by utter retards and they decided they'd try to sell it for not much cheaper than a mac. a deliberate move to kill sales and to make the mac look better (it wasn't better - it was worse). unfortunately apple didn't sell many 2gs compared to macs, not that macs were selling in great numbers during this time either. apple's main source of revenue was from captive audiences such as contracts with schools. very limited audience.

>>11795704
The Mac had specific advantages over the IIgs like CPU power and a crisp monochrome display.

>>11795689
>BASIC fucking sucks and using it as some kind of benchmark, when people were mainly programming in assembler, was always batshit insane
I mean, it is pretty dogshit, but it's also extremely easy to learn and a lot of people started with it just to get a general idea of programming before moving on to something better

>>11795704
The question is:
Is the rumor about the CPU being underclocked to make the Mac look better real, or was it for legit reasons like pic related?

>>11795706
> cpu power
what power? the average amount of time the 68000 CPU on classic macs spent drawing the screen, just idling on the desktop, was 30-40% of its time. add your operations to move around graphics, your other code to do shit.. most of that CPU time is maxed out leading to the OS slowing down to a crawl. the retard geniuses at apple decided early on it would be cheaper to not have any blitter chip and do it all in software, just to save money. this great crisp display, the amount of ram it used and CPU time to just draw on it made it seem completely worthless. it was worthless. looked nice. anyway apple's solution was to just throw bigger motorola chips at it.. '020, '030 etc.

>>11795716
That is correct. The 65816 couldn't work reliably at higher clock speeds because of a retarded die layout--it was designed by one guy and his wife in their living room.

>>11795718
The slow graphics speed was actually due to use of the API routines for graphics functions. Apple explicitly did not want you writing directly to the screen buffer because it might cause software to break on future Mac iterations.

>>11795386
I mean both systems are objectively worse.
>PC-88
It's got lots of memory and high res screen, but terribly expensive and very slow at rendering graphics.
>MSX
It's just not great.

>>11795723
>The slow graphics speed was actually due to use of the API routines for graphics functions
you can blame the api as much as you like (not that everyone used apple's garbage rom routines anyway). you can't generate free graphics by magic. the cpu has to copy everything into a framebuffer for it to be shifted out to the video output. everything. every time you move an icon, move the fucking mouse, it's all drawn using software (assembly, apple's shitty rom routines, whatever you use). whoever designed the hardware was fucking idiot.

>>11795731
Were apple engineers too retarded for blitter and bitplane graphics?

>>11795731
PCs had the same setup. So did the Apple II family. The IIgs in particular was dog poop slow.

You never recovered from this
https://warosu.org/vr/thread/6851339

>>11795735
>Were apple engineers too retarded for blitter and bitplane graphics?
kinda expensive and apple's engineers at that time weren't known for their inventiveness. they were literal off the shelf part pickers. and for things like blitter they couldn't just easily buy a chip. not yet anyway. they had no people like 6502 inventor chuck peddle or amiga/atari chipset designer like jay miner that could design such chips in their sleep. it was also much cheaper to build the slop apple wanted to sell with less chips in order to make higher profits. they knew they could make this money while cutting corners because they were keen on marketing the system with exclusivity in mind.

>>11795743
>that thread
aka the origin of the guy who spams small rom size Famicom games every day here.

>>11795746
they were still very big on the Wozniak philosophy of making clever use of off-the-shelf parts. they avoided using complex ASICs like Commodore did and any ASICs they did use were small and mostly just to combine some logic chips.

>>11795386
>we
Excuse me?

>micro-hating weebs are out of fashion
No one "Hates" them, they're just shitty computers.

>>11795731
Atari did that with the ST but their computers were actually cheap

>>11795743
That thread is painfully retarded, especially the dumbasses arguing over how gaming "died" in America, despite the fact that PC gaming was booming.

>>11795764
>they were still very big on the Wozniak philosophy
unfortunately.

>>11795781
thankfully midi saved its ass. that was a bright idea from one of tramiel's sons who was getting into the hobby of electronic music and insisted on the new computer having midi ports.

>>11795743
> entire thread is nintentoddler having severe mental breakdown after being told their nes is shit
MANY such cases.

>>11795781
the Spectrum of 16-bit computers

>>11795783
The C64 was literally the reason for the crash in the first place.
Everyone started buying C64s instead of Ataris.

The "Video Game Crash" was just the Atari Crash.

>>11794978 (OP)
>It's achieved most classic 8-bit computer status. Nothing else even comes close even if the specs are better in some way or another.
I've never even used a C64 and I can agree with this statement. The catch is that it was really Commodores only significant product as everything before and after never caught on.

>>11794978 (OP)
It was great. And it came with a nice manual explaining how it worked and how to program it. If the disk drive were just a little bit faster it would be the perfect machine.

It was and still is iconic but in hindsight I would have preferred an Atari 800.
First game I saw on the 64 was "Castle Of Terror" and it fascinated me beyond belief.

>>11795689
>BASIC fucking sucks and using it as some kind of benchmark, when people were mainly programming in assembler, was always batshit insane.
They weren't. Most people programmed in BASIC primarily and only used assembly for small things if at all. The demoscene isn't representative of all people even in Denmark or whatever lol. Scene only came into full swing after Commodore was fully out of business.

>>11795726
Those old Jap systems are literal garbage only used by modern otaku for their retro-gayming amusement. They're not worth getting into as a user again unless you're a retroweeb otaku. They will hoard them all up like they have been with FM-Towns, PC-98 and especially the X68000 anyways though lol.

>>11796549
>They weren't
they were
>Most people programmed in BASIC primarily
never happened
> for small things if at all
stop lying.
>some ramblings about the demoscene
lmao
>Scene only came into full swing after Commodore was fully out of business
existed well before then. why does this board's collective of losers and failures need to lie about things that a google search proves wrong in 2 seconds? is it severe mental retardation? or do you really believe in your own repulsive lies?

>>11795968
>The C64 was literally the reason for the crash in the first place.
never happened. the only thing commodore did was force TI out of the computer market. what other schizo make believe fantasies do you have to share?

>>11796549
The PC-88 was an expensive business computer, the MSX was cheaper and for home users to play vidya on.

think of a PC-88 as being like a ZX Spectrum on steroids

>Z80 box with basic frame buffer graphics and beeper sound
but of course with proper computer features like a good keyboard, RGB monitor, disk drives etc.

>>11795723
They had them going fine at 8MHz and some examples would do 12MHz. This sounds just made up, last chip that was laid out by hand was the SID anyways.

>>11796961
no really you can read about the 65816 the original die was poorly laid out and had some really long signal lines

>>11796973
Sounds made up actually.

>>11795863
Entire thread is one madlad having an aneurysm over the C64 not impressing anyone

>>11795968
No, the reason the crash happened was because there were 8 different consoles and they all played the same game. The Commodore 64 survived because it could do more than just play games. It was a computer, and people used it for work. A lot of early RPG's were programmed on the C64, like Questron.

>>11794978 (OP)
oi me speccy con ate dis fook for crump. get this fook outtayar

>>11797009
>people used it for work
Not really. I'm sure some did. A few. But the Apple ][ and the IBM between them were much more office computer friendly. Fuck the C64 couldn't even do 80 columns, something considered CRITICAL for ALL office work.

C64 was seen as an educational purchase, preferable to a Nintendo, and piracy was so easy back then that kids just naturally figured out how to do it or learned from their friends or even by reading magazines in the library. Overall it was a cheaper purchase too - couple of joysticks and a box of floppies and they'd be copying games in no time, no need to constantly buy new cartridges.

>>11797025
>C64 was seen as an educational purchase, preferable to a Nintendo, and

The peak years of C64 were 1984-87 before the NES had really gotten established.

>>11797034
Those were the peak years for NES sales actually. By 1990 everybody who wanted a Nintendo had one already. At least in the US.

C64 directly competed with consoles. And thirdies and europoors were using them well beyond their due date simply because they were poor.

>>11797048
>84-87
for FC sales in Japan yes but the NES didn't really take off in the US until late 87

>>11797062
So?

>>11797025
>the Apple ][ and the IBM between them were much more office computer friendly
I'm not saying that the C64 was an office computer, I'm saying it was a home computer. Of course office computers are going to have a much different preference from the specs of the C64. People all over the country were buying it en mass due to how cheap it was and it allowed them to quickly type up essays, use spreadsheets, and allowed them to immediately begin using it to code, without the need for loading from a disk or cartridge. That was a huge feature at the time, where virtually no other computer had that capability.

>>11797205
Sure, it was a home computer. Lots of people bought them for a hundred reasons. But, it was *the* CHEAP home computer. The cheapest one that wasn't an obvious toy like the Sinclair machines. So it also found its niche in gaming. Are you going to claim it wasn't popular for games? It had scads of them. It was designed as a computer which could be bought for kids, whereas the Apple ]['s and PCs were more expensive, but were seen as full throated hobbyist machines as well as business computers. C64's memory limitations were a deal breaker for the serious home computer user too.

>>11797025
>the Apple ][ and the IBM between them were much more office computer friendly
I'm not saying that the C64 was an office computer, I'm saying it was a home computer. Of course office computers are going to have a much different preference from the specs of the C64. People all over the country were buying it en mass due to how cheap it was and it allowed them to quickly type up essays, use spreadsheets, and allowed them to immediately begin using it to code, without the need for loading from a disk or cartridge, and it allowed you to code larger and more complex programs due to the fact that the built-in RAM of the C64 was larger than any other home computers on the market. That's why it was marketed as the Commodore "64". It had 64 KB of RAM. The only closest competitor was the Apple II+ at 48.

>>11797212
You were responding to my original post
>>11797214

But
>The cheapest one that wasn't an obvious toy like the Sinclair machines. So it also found its niche in gaming.
It was cheap, but that didn't mean that it didn't have quality. Its graphics and sound chips were comprehensive and complex, its graphics rivalling and surpassing the NES in many regards, and its sound chip being unsurpassed on home consoles until the SNES.

>C64's memory limitations were a deal breaker for the serious home computer user too.
They were better than other home computers when it released.

>>11796480
>in hindsight I would have preferred an Atari 800
Why? Genuinely curious

>>11797025
>Overall it was a cheaper purchase too - couple of joysticks and a box of floppies

The floppy drive was more expensive than the C64 itself.

>>11797025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozTOuwZBNv0

So it CAN.
Also, people made music with it. My mother did transcribing SID music. I did schoolwork on the word processor stuff, also did some printshop with it, occasionally went online to download games or chat.

The C128 followed it up with native 80 column mode. I played some infocoms with that.

But yeah, it was a lot of games as well. We had like 300 disks of games, half pirated with like twenty games on double sided disks, half legit games that were given to us.

>>11797048
>And thirdies and europoors were using them well beyond their due date simply because they were poor.

Nintendo didn't have any decent cross european representation until the mid-90s/early 00s. They were only present in a few countries. Shit like N64 games had to be imported in eastern europe because they sent a total inventory of like 20 carts of a game to each country.

>>11797048
>C64 directly competed with consoles. And thirdies and europoors were using them well beyond their due date
Zoomers seem to think anyone trashed their old console the moment a new one came out but any big popular platform was still widely used after becoming "obsolete".

The NES still sold well years after the SNES came out (and Nintendo still made new Famicoms until 2003 !)
The PSone outsold the PS2 at release.

>>11794978 (OP)
>>11794980
What is this point of this idiotic zoomer writing?

>>11798113
This
It's not a poverty thing either because even when my friends and I got modern PCs and 6th gen consoles we'd still play multiplayer N64 games together all the time

>>11798171
It's funny how people on a fucking retro video game board can't understand why people would play an old system.

>>11798192
When the SNES came out the NES was not retro. You'd have to go back to Pong to be retro then, really. Retro isn't a thing that existed until there were already old systems, when video gaming was new there was nothing from before then, hence there was no retro.

There will be no retro either, not in the future. Games are tied to online now in various ways and they will all go away some day. Have been since over a decade ago.

>>11798750
Who cares what it was called?

Did NES games suddenly become unfun the moment the SNES was released and then suddenly became fun again when they could be called retro?

>>11794978 (OP)
the sound chip is beyond legendary, there's hundreds of great tunes on it

>>11794978 (OP)
>Nothing else even comes close
Atari 800 and 800XL are its natural rivals, and in many ways superior for the games they shared. and I'm a C64 fanboy.

>>11798991
the most sovlful chip in existence
no two sid chips sound exactly alike due to its analog parts and dodgy fabrication

>>11799036
it was specifically the analog filters on the 6581 which varied slightly from lot to lot. all 8580s sound identical though.

>>11799036
>>11799040
the irony being the 6581 sounded better when filter were used

>>11798991
>sound chip is beyond legendary
It is and it's a real shame that over 60% of those chips are dead because of commodore's bad design choices.
Check the power supplies. Be really careful about using controllers that aren't made for the system.

>>11794978 (OP)
>It's achieved most classic 8-bit computer status
*for white people

>>11799053
6581s mostly got damaged because the filters are very delicate and easy to zap from ESD. this is due to the design; the traces in the filters are extremely close to each other so a static spark can easily jump between them.

>>11796989
even stevie wonder reading this with text to speech can see nintentoddlers having a mental breakdown in that thread.

>>11799059
wasn't just 6581. PLA and CIA chips were just as fragile due to the early MOS manufacturing processes used to create them. they had no resistance to static whatsoever.

>>11799053
>It is and it's a real shame that over 60% of those chips are dead
that's nonsense.

>>11799047
8580 filters are the closest to the original specification for the chip. people forget that the 6581 was rushed into production in time for CES show. 6581 filters, despite not being on spec, do sound amazing. 8580 is very sterile.

>>11799085
the PLAs had overheating issues. CIAs just got zapped from ESD or hot plugging stuff. and in fact it was quite normal back then for chips to have no ESD protection, clamp diodes were not widely used yet.

>>11794978 (OP)
The spectrum 48K is more iconic. I see all these as equals
amiga/st/spectrum 48K/amstrad cpc/trs80/vic20/zx81/bbc micro/dragon 32/atari 400/800/commodore 64
But the unique appearance of the spectrum sets it apart

>>11799230
> more iconic
never happened. c64 was the best selling micro computer of all time
> appearance
people didn't buy computers based on how they looked.

>>11799230
who the fuck cared about the speccy outside of britain?
the c64 was popular everywhere in the West

>>11799085
>that's nonsense.
You sure about that?
Also are you seriously going to ignore the warning about the power supplies?

>>11799230
>The spectrum 48K is more iconic.
Don't be fucking stupid.

>I see all these as equals
Now you've left stupid behind for mentally retarded.

>>11799262
>who the fuck cared about the speccy outside of britain?
nobody.
>>11799269
> we've gone from chips to power supplies
> like they're the same thing
are you retarded?
>You sure about that?
very sure about the state of 6581 chips and very sure that you're retarded.

as for the power supply shit, a non-issue. and if you're not a drooling fucking retard such as yourself, you can test in 5 seconds to see if it's good with a multimeter. besides that, only the wedged shaped psus released in early 80s were the most problematic. all mine from 1986 still output the right voltages. and all my 6581 machines work perfectly.

do you have any more schizophrenic arguments i can shit on while i'm here?

>>11799287
Euro C64s had the wedge PSU and it got exceptionally hot as it has no vent slats. The black brick US PSU does have vent slats. It may be ok as long as you don't sit it on a carpet. BTW in the C128 PSU Bil Herd made sure to include a crowbar circuit as overvoltage protection.

>>11799081
The one guy spamming the thread was posting pro-C64/anti-NES pics

>>11799302
bil herd is the chad of chads.

>>11799304
fuck the nes, faggot.

idk my dad purchased his in 84 and he had it until 95 when he got a 486 PC. the thing was about 11 years old then and working fine with no malfunctions.

I've heard it said PAL C64s were more reliable than NTSC ones overall. this could be because more of them were later production units when the hardware was fully mature, perhaps also because American homes were more likely to have carpet and result in ESD damage.

>>11799328
There was this boomer on AtariAge in an A8 vs C64 thread where he spent numerous posts ranting that he worked at K-Mart back then and the return rate for C64s was horrendous they had an entire mountain of defective units in the back room. customers would return and swap machines sometimes 4-5 times before they got a stable unit that didn't self-destruct in a month of purchase.

>>11799307
>fuck one of the most popular consoles of all time, home of many of the best video games ever created by many 3rd party devs
Yeahhh fuck the nes, I'll go play some britjank!

>>11799338
Kinda like old NES's. Same deal happened there.

>>11799338
the early ones in 82-83 were quite bad yes. my dad knew this guy who bought one, it was DOA and he just bought a different C64 and put the dead one in the new unit's box and returned it to the store lol. i think his fell victim to the PLA plague that affected early units. the PLA had a low yield and most came off the line defective so Commodore to meet shipping quotas put known duds in machines and shipped them with the idea that the computer would be returned to the factory and the PLA later swapped for a good one.

>>11799346
if you mean the first Famicoms in 83 that got recalled that was a quite different problem

yes it's true that Nintendo like Commodore rushed out a half-complete beta unit that had lots of problems and stability issues until they got everything ironed out

>>11799368
No no when Nintendo does the same thing it's not a big deal at all. When Commodore does it, it's huge though. I hope you can understand this. It's important.

>>11799368
>>11799354
we never saw those early bad FCs, the problems were fixed long before they ever got released outside Japan

>>11799287
>as for the power supply shit, a non-issue.
Good job spreading dangerous misinformation.
Absolute retard.

>>11799257
>>11799262
I'm fucking sick of brandfaggots like you and I'm begining to think you were not even alive in the early 80s let alone programmig on them.
>>11799285
THis board is one of the most brandfaggoty and least knowledgeable places on the internet on old 8 bit computers but to not recognise the ZX spectrum as iconic just shows how disconnected you zommers who were never around for any of these systems or old game consoles are. I worked for Sinclair and I also worked for commodor/amiga and Atari. I'm not going to waist any time more on your nonsense,
This board is shit.

>>11800129
I really hope this is ironic

>>11799863
as I said just test it on a multimeter it's not hard

>>11800129
>to not recognise the ZX spectrum as iconic
It's not iconic. It occupied perhaps a memorable place as the cheapest possible computer you could buy. But it's remembered especially for being a piece of shit, with an awful keyboard. Sure eventually things were fixed and upgraded over time. But it was just a trash computer and it's the worst of the bunch of '80s 8-bit machines.

If it was all your parents or you could afford, well it's certainly better than no computer at all. That's the kindest thing one can say about it. I've read the book on that computer too, The ZX Spectrum ULA, where you are guided through the entire system and how it works. It works. Guy who designed the ULA is a sheer WIZARD. But it was all done to serve the absolute lowest price point.

>>11795610
IIGS kicked ass it was just under-used by games programmers and filled with edu-tainment shitware. Even at the crippled 2MHz speed (should have been 8MHz or even 12MHz) you could have all kinds of things going on the screen at once, some titles even had multiple scrolling backgrounds somehow. SCSI, Appletalk networking in ROM, etc.

I still have mine, still works great and I've upgraded it a bit with a CFFA and a SCSI adapter too.

>>11801014
ZX Spectrum was the fasfest bitmap machine among all 8-bit computers, leading to a ton of unique games others couldn't run nearly as well.

>>11801089
I thought the Atari 8-bits were relatively fast as the bitmap screen was entirely linear.

>>11801089
Yeah that is actually neat. I don't hate the computer. I just think that it's a cheap piece of junk. So are many Commodores including some Commodore 64's, even though it won.

>>11801091
Yeah it was also damn fast, but the color attributes use too much memory. Spectrum games are more detailed looking because of the efficient use of color memory.

>>11801140
The 64K revisions weren't junk.

>>11801190
The A8s actually didn't have any color attributes you just had 4 colors via register select lol.

>>11799302
It didn't have slats but just fins. It was potted so no air could get in.

>>11801483
the first C64s in '82 didn't have the epoxy potting it was added later to prevent people from taking the things apart and electrocuting themselves

Oi m8, wanna buy a Speccy or C64?

Blimey it's only a young Roger Water of Pink Floyd havin a game of Zniggy

>>11801596
Shit i didnt know breadbin c64 was this big.

>>11801598
I didn't know a 40 year old guy in 1983 could look this young.

>>11801678
Now zoomers and alphoomers look 40 when they’re 18 due to microplastics and hormones in the water

>>11799342
>>fuck one of the most popular consoles of all time
yes. that's correct.

>>11801494
> to prevent people from taking the things apart
false
> and electrocuting themselves
true, and for fire resistance.

>>11802784
The fact it's home of many great games is a lie though, fuck the NES, all shovelware. C64 has all the great games including the actual definitive version of Castlevania.

>>11802881
>C64 has all the great games including the actual definitive version of Castlevania
It has the definitive version of Double Dragon too. (^: :^)

>>11802881
sadly every time there is a c64 thread here, the same nintendtoddlers that here every day can't help themselves and must mention nes, like it was a proper computer.
> all shovelware
yes

>>11802898
double dragon on c64 is a bit slow but i used to like it. so difficult too.

>>11803115
I like how your post implies the C64 was a proper computer (it wasn't).

>>11801675
They are pretty large and beefy. Uncomfortable to type on without a wrist rest too after a bit.

>>11803115
Seriously, we need to do something about all these people thinking titles like Ninja Gaiden or Castlevania aren't shovelware! C64 is just the real 8bit king. /vr/ is just full of nintoddlers who don't know reality. In the real world, people don't know what a NES is, C64 is what people associate retro games with. Not Nintendo.

>>11795706
>and a crisp monochrome display
IIgs had a couple video cards which tackled this issue IIRC.

>>11796010
>The catch is that it was really Commodores only significant product as everything before and after never caught on.
Amiga unironically flopped in the USA, big time. Probably because there was no ready to go full office suite at launch, computers without office software capability were seen as toys for kids.

In Europe it did much better but I think that's more because Commodore dumped a bunch there over time on the cheap because Americans weren't buying them outside specific niches. Growing up back in the era when the Amiga was current, I only knew ONE person with one. The only other time I saw one was when I did public access TV, we had one for a titler and other jazz. I disliked it intensely, the OS was not my thing for whatever reason.

>>11796634
>existed well before then.
Existed, sure. But not in "full swing."

Big parties weren't a thing until the 1990s.

>>11799040
Not only that, the 6581's signal lines were too close so everything leaked by induction, once you played something you could crank the music (if you had nice speakers) and hear all kinds of weird echoes and permutations of what had been going through it. It was quite literally alive in a way no other synthesizer has ever been, that's why they sound so great and are so musical.

8580 is fully soulless by comparison.

>>11799257
>people didn't buy computers based on how they looked.
Yes they did and Commodore reacted to this by refreshing the C64's design to try to match the Amiga a bit at one point. Breadbin began to look dated after only a couple years.

I had one as a child. We used to play Kickman on it but no emulator footage of the game sounds the way I remember it sounding. It was much louder and more harmonic as I remember it to be.

>>11794978 (OP)
isn't this a board for old video games? what's with this dumb keyboard?

>>11803498
C64 goes head to head with '80s 8-bit consoles at the same price point. It was meant to attack the games market. It's purpose is making sound and music while putting sprites on the screen.

>>11803498
It mogs jap consoles sorry (go back to /v/ btw)

>>11803603
>>11803616
what in the goddamn fuck are you talking about?

>>11803618
How the C64 won. It won you know.

Look at it vs. anything from the era. While SNES might have some iconic games, the C64 has them too now. C64 is the ultimate machine of the 8-bit era.

>>11803630
what the fuck is the c64?

>>11803646
It's what won, my lil bingbing wahooin' zoomer.

>>11804564
I don't think that's true, anon. I've never heard anyone in real life ever talk about anything called a c64, and winners get talked about.

>>11804619
Why sage this pleasant thread though, is it competing with the latest announcement of a remake of a bingbing wahoo classic favorite?

>>11804632
you keep saying binging wahoo like i'm supposed to know what the fuck that means.
you're weird as fuck. when was the last time you communicated with another person outside of this website?

>>11804642
You know what it means, you're getting a bit salty too.

>>11804659
whatever you say, dork

>>11803498
Even for bait that post is cringe.

>>11799338
The return rates for C64 in the years immediately following its launch were pretty high, but 4 or 5 per customer is an absolute bullshit number. If the return rate for them was actually as high as that, it would've sunk the brand. The fact that there was no major recall, legal action, or major news stories against them shows that this problem wasn't that big of an issue.

>>11805630
i think the PLA was by far the biggest source of problems in there since it was using a new process Commodore had trouble figuring out and the chip also got really hot when running