Posted Fri Jan 05, 2018 2:38 pm
I dunno - I think I have to disagree. It totally depends on the software you're trying to run. If a game was made for NTSC, it'll likely play slower on a PAL machine. And a lot of times PAL software simply locks up on NTSC machines.
I think the best of both worlds (again, space and $$) is to have one of each. It's pretty easy to see which games are for which machine. If it was coded in the UK, more often than not it's going to be PAL (unless they made a special NTSC version, which did happen).
Most of my focus is pre-1992 games. So in that department I'm usually playing games made in the US that work perfectly. If it's an arcade port, most simply pale in comparison to the consoles of the same era, and I haven't spent a lot of focus there. A single-button joystick keeps things pretty limited in that department. Street Fighter? Mortal Kombat? Oh man... it's silly, you know? Pull out your SNES/Genesis and don't even think about an Amiga version there.
If I could only have one, I'd probably stick with what I know was made for the region I live in. And if I were from Europe I'd absolutely buy and use a PAL machine (possibly exclusively). But I have to tell you - it's fascinating now that I have both. I can see the timing differences first hand. I can see how some of the graphics get stretched - even using CRTs. It's an amazing thing to witness these various differences in the hardware.
But yeah - if I were you Bulletdust (you're in the UK, right?) I'd stick with what you have, too. Makes sense as you're probably playing games from there. I'm stuck in Electronic Arts, Lucasfilm/Arts, Activision, SSI, Epyx, Broderbund, MicroProse, Origin, Raven Software, Westwood Studios, Binary Systems... But man, when I'm needing some Sensible Software, Bullfrog, Bitmap Bros, Psynogsis... man, I'm so lucky I have a machine I can fire things up on now and go for it! Best of both worlds.