Heaven/TQA Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 for doing ports best would be to release the sources and the data + tools like done with numen... re sound fx...does MPT support sound fx? or did you patched the mpt driver? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eru Posted November 11, 2007 Share Posted November 11, 2007 for doing ports best would be to release the sources and the data + tools like done with numen... we will re sound fx...does MPT support sound fx? or did you patched the mpt driver? We use a trick. There is a separate track for FX, where every 32 frames (ball jump) there is a sound played with a fixed instrument number. Just before calling the music routine, we change that instrument address in the instrument-address array, and MPT plays the instrument we want. It's very limited, but it works for us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heaven/TQA Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 ah... because i thought that MPT does not support sound fx in games officially... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaPa Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 Just a small question... would it be possible to rotate the tunnel itself isntead of moving ball around? Is the engine able to do that? Yes, it is possible to rotate the tunnel, not exactly with this engine, but with a very similar one. However, it would only work with 128KB RAM. And it would make rendering a bit slower, making the tunnel animation work in 3 frames (2 currently). A cart version could work with rotating tunnel with 64KB. But, I really wanted the game to work on 64K. And I actually like the fact that you're sometimes upside down. I haven't played it, but I've heard Super Mario Galaxy has levels like this, with varying gravity direction If you like it upside down sometimes it could be done by making the tunnel rotate at half speed and moving the ball at half speed in oposite direction too Oop. My calculations were a bit out there. Should be 20 and 16.66. From memory, 15-18 frames per second is right at that perception point where you can really tell that something is jerky animation. Also at the point where modern FPS games become near unplayable and you have to splash out for a better graphics card (or turn everthing down). It depends.. for me in FPS "anything" below 60-70 Hz is jerky because no motion blur like in 20 FPS movies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEtalGuy66 Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 Just a small question... would it be possible to rotate the tunnel itself isntead of moving ball around? Is the engine able to do that? Yes, it is possible to rotate the tunnel, not exactly with this engine, but with a very similar one. However, it would only work with 128KB RAM. And it would make rendering a bit slower, making the tunnel animation work in 3 frames (2 currently). A cart version could work with rotating tunnel with 64KB. But, I really wanted the game to work on 64K. And I actually like the fact that you're sometimes upside down. I haven't played it, but I've heard Super Mario Galaxy has levels like this, with varying gravity direction If you like it upside down sometimes it could be done by making the tunnel rotate at half speed and moving the ball at half speed in oposite direction too Oop. My calculations were a bit out there. Should be 20 and 16.66. From memory, 15-18 frames per second is right at that perception point where you can really tell that something is jerky animation. Also at the point where modern FPS games become near unplayable and you have to splash out for a better graphics card (or turn everthing down). It depends.. for me in FPS "anything" below 60-70 Hz is jerky because no motion blur like in 20 FPS movies. Well, the human eye can only detect motion at 22-25fps... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fröhn Posted November 12, 2007 Share Posted November 12, 2007 Well, the human eye can only detect motion at 22-25fps... Wrong. The human eye recognizes "fluid motion" on 25+ fps, but you can still easily see the difference between 50 and 25 fps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GameEngine Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 In case 20 fps is not enough one can... turn brightnes / contrast down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 (edited) Well, the human eye can only detect motion at 22-25fps... Wrong. The human eye recognizes "fluid motion" on 25+ fps, but you can still easily see the difference between 50 and 25 fps. It's mainly caused by a wrong "quantization" . If the eye doesn't get what it "wants" , you recognize jerkyness on the screen. Having a look at "Counterstrike" on the PC. People say they can see a difference between 80 and 100 fps. Well... they even cannot see a difference between 30 and 60 fps. But they see the wrong generated picture in the needed timeframe. Or.... having a look at analogue techniques for recording and playing movies. With 18 frames per Second you see everything correct. In the digital age (MPEG / HDTV) and with 50 or 60 Hz TVs you see jerky movement.... It's the more interesting, because most people do not recognize it. Same with the false colours and the spreaded 4:3 picture to 16:9 ... But that's another story. Edited November 13, 2007 by emkay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaPa Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 To FPS theme... http://www.daniele.ch/school/30vs60/30vs60_1.html (all 3 pages). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fröhn Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 (edited) In case 20 fps is not enough one can... turn brightnes / contrast down. Just use the edges of your eyesight. You can easily recognize 200+ Hz there. Especially annoying with the new car backlights which are LED-based. Since they flicker at 200-300 Hz it is VERY annoying to see that flicker everywhere in traffic (and the car manufacturers still claim that no human can see it... I SEE IT EVERY GODDAMN DAY DAMNIT!!! ). Having a look at "Counterstrike" on the PC. People say they can see a difference between 80 and 100 fps. Well... they even cannot see a difference between 30 and 60 fps. But they see the wrong generated picture in the needed timeframe. Not sure about 80 vs 100, but 30 vs 60 is EASILY recognizeable. Or.... having a look at analogue techniques for recording and playing movies. With 18 frames per Second you see everything correct. On TV I can also see the difference between 25 fps and 50 fps in movies. Some movies use the time shift of the 2nd halfpicture and produce true 50 fps instead of 25, and it looks MUCH smoother. Sometimes you also see that a movie is 25 fps but a scroller from the station put on top is 50 fps. It's the more interesting, because most people do not recognize it. They do, but they don't know how to put it into words. My mom for example recognized all the artefacting in DVB-S but for her it was nearly impossible to discribe what she disliked about the new picture. Edited November 13, 2007 by Fröhn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 Not sure about 80 vs 100, but 30 vs 60 is EASILY recognizeable. No. It's not. The hint "staring at a display with 70Hz" is also not a provement for seeing 70Hz flicker. You simply see resulting effects that "interfere" between the shown frequency and the receptors in the eyes. Same with your LED flicker... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fröhn Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 Not sure about 80 vs 100, but 30 vs 60 is EASILY recognizeable. No. It's not. So you claim that it is impossible to see if an animation runs at 25 (30) or 50 (60) Hz? Weird enough I can do it. How comes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 (edited) Not sure about 80 vs 100, but 30 vs 60 is EASILY recognizeable. No. It's not. So you claim that it is impossible to see if an animation runs at 25 (30) or 50 (60) Hz? Weird enough I can do it. How comes? It's a simple thing, but hard to explain in english: Your eyes are receiving "white" .... then the white is stored for a short while for some milliseconds. The display is flickering with it's own frequency. When the "stored" white is gone, the eye captures the next picture. if the eye captures the next picture when in the same time the picture is black, it mixes up with the white. Relative to the frequency of the display, you see every 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc... frame darker. But you don't see all flickering. I do not claim that it is impossible to see a difference between 30 and 60Hz. One possibility I explained before: Digitally generated pictures are mostly not time correct. The higher the framerate, the more exact the frame is build in the needed timeframe. 100% exact timing makes it possible to reduce the needed frames per second. And, there is another problem.... not caused by the human eyes, but by some technical issues. Movies that were recorded with 24 frames cannot be shown exactly with 30fps. Using 60fps makes it even better to correct the time-frame. To have 24 fps Movies also clean and straight on a PC, is only possible with a multiply of the framerate (24,48,72,96,120 Hz). Same with 18fps Movies (18,36,54,72,90,108,126,144,162,180Hz) ... and so on.... Edited November 13, 2007 by emkay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eru Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 Oh c'mon, guys, go discuss it in some bar while drinking a beer. I'm sure that after 5 you will agree you're both right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miker Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 ah... because i thought that MPT does not support sound fx in games officially... Really??? By default MPT had sound FX support but the player itself was broken a bit. See Yie Ar Kung Fu. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 Oh c'mon, guys, go discuss it in some bar while drinking a beer. I'm sure that after 5 you will agree you're both right My argues implement that you see a difference between 30 and 60 fps. But you don't see 30 and 60 fps. You "see resulting frames" caused by several issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goochman Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 Are there any changes to Yoomp from the version posted at the begining of this msg? Looks like this will be the HSC game starting next week and Id like everyone to play the latest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eru Posted November 13, 2007 Share Posted November 13, 2007 (edited) There are some minor changes, but nothing influencing gameplay or scoring. The next official version will come out some time soon, it's hard to say. I'm curious what the scores will be. I wonder if anyone will beat X-Ray - he has mastered this game, really Edited November 13, 2007 by eru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atari8man2004 Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 Im wondering has anyone made a flash image of Yoomp! and would it fit on a 1 mb flash cart? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rybags Posted November 16, 2007 Share Posted November 16, 2007 You should be able to just put the XEX on a cart and run it from a menu. What I'd like to see is a Level Editor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fröhn Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 I do not claim that it is impossible to see a difference between 30 and 60Hz.One possibility I explained before: Digitally generated pictures are mostly not time correct. The higher the framerate, the more exact the frame is build in the needed timeframe. 100% exact timing makes it possible to reduce the needed frames per second. But if you do 25 fps it IS time correct even if you have a 50 Hz display. And you still see the difference (and 25 Hz flickers like hell due to "flickering edges" effect on every sharp contrast). Btw, even if the display is 50 Hz vs 100 Hz you see the difference. I remember some arcades which had a 100 Hz CRT and it looked much smoother than anything I have seen on a 50 Hz display. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beetle Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 Any interest in porting it to th Jaguar!?!? id love to have it on the Jaguar buddy! And we need a port to the Lynx as well. I want to play it anywhere! (Lynx has a version of a 6502 at 4 MHz) Again, kudos to eru for that great game! Regards, Beetle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majinbuu Posted December 17, 2007 Share Posted December 17, 2007 well you have the attention of the c64 crowd, they have their own thread of the game at http://www.lemon64.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25209 I guess they are jealous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted December 17, 2007 Share Posted December 17, 2007 well you have the attention of the c64 crowd, they have their own thread of the game at http://www.lemon64.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25209 I guess they are jealous Interesting thread. Didn't try running the demos they've put together, as I don't have a C64 emulator on my system. From the sounds of it, they won't be able to get it running quite as nice as on the Atari. Still, will be interesting to see what can be done. ..Al Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eru Posted December 17, 2007 Share Posted December 17, 2007 About the C64 version: I really hope the guys will manage to provide a sufficiently smooth tunnel-rendering engine. While C64 is better for many types of games (don't shoot me, it's true), in this case they can't compete with Atari's higher CPU frequency and native 2x2 graphics mode. Beetle - your suggestion to port it to Lynx seems very much doable. I quickly looked into Lynx specs, and I don't see why we couldn't do that - it's 6502, enough memory, even faster clock speed, and lots of colors However, I would need some info on how to program for Lynx in general. Anybody here with any experience? Or some useful links? Anyway, that's for the future, as now I'm busy with real-life stuff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.