Atari v Commodore

[STE'86]

...btw, you didn't tell me what gprior mode 0 is yet, I thought everyone was supposed to know? If someone just told me instead of keeping it a secret, if it was better than a C64 "mode" and useful I'd be happy to say "well done A8" as I've done on the posts about Head over Heels and other posts.

 

 

Patience, grasshoppa...

 

ah, the short translation of this is "not got a f*cking clue and was rather hoping that a load of other fanboys would jump on pete for not knowing this"

[Irgendwer]

I suppose I can't win on this site because most Atarians won't concede a point. Waste of time really.

 

You are here to 'win'? Then this would be of course a waste of time.

 

Maybe this helps you: Even if I didn't comment everything, I'm with you regarding many points.

Feeling better?

 

Hint: Stop trying to convince zealots!

Edited September 5, 2009 by Irgendwer

[dwhyte]

ah, the short translation of this is "not got a f*cking clue and was rather hoping that a load of other fanboys would jump on pete for not knowing this"

 

Wrong again... Nice try though...

Edited September 5, 2009 by dwhyte

[andym00]

...btw, you didn't tell me what gprior mode 0 is yet, I thought everyone was supposed to know? If someone just told me instead of keeping it a secret, if it was better than a C64 "mode" and useful I'd be happy to say "well done A8" as I've done on the posts about Head over Heels and other posts.

 

 

Patience, grasshoppa...

 

Why patience? you know so much, you tell me then I can get on with my life

 

I'm only hazarding a rough guess here, but if I remember right it's how player (and missle) bit patterns interact with the graphics data on the bus.. There's some weird logical operations going on with the playfield colours and the Player/Missle data.. Badoom tish.. Loadsa colours..

This is how they can achieve their mystical 23 (questionably useful) 23 colours per line..

There are other threads about this on AA, but I can't remember where (probably the 5200 programming forum), but Atariski seems to made himself the high priest on this mode, so I'd best wait for him and his cut'n'pasted basic program

Anyway, now I've spoken up since you weren't getting any answer, I'll no doubt get clobbered for getting it wrong

[andym00]

Here you, go.. I forgot Rybags was also master of this gubbins

http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/147037-color-in-antic-e/page__p__1790850entry1790850

[PeteD]

I suppose I can't win on this site because most Atarians won't concede a point. Waste of time really.

 

You are here to 'win'? Then this would be of course a waste of time.

 

Maybe this helps you: Even if I didn't comment everything, I'm with you regarding many points.

Feeling better?

 

Hint: Stop trying to convince zealots!

 

lol I don't even want to win, it's not my intention and never has been for joining this site or posting in this thread. What would be nice once in a while is when there's been a bit of toing and froing between programmers from both sides that if just once the really defensive guys would admit that something miiiight just be better on C64.

 

 

Pete

[Rybags]

It's got nothing to do with "bit patterns interact with the graphics data on the bus".

 

Not selecting a Priority scheme means the graphics and PMG data gets ORed in certain combinations.

 

23 colours, useful or not, is still 7 more than the C-64 is able to produce.

[PeteD]

Here you, go.. I forgot Rybags was also master of this gubbins

http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/147037-color-in-antic-e/page__p__1790850entry1790850

 

I thought it was something like that from reading other threads where Atariksi is arguing about the merits of the A8 hardware, but nowhere that I've found so far apart from Atariksi's posts is that "called" mode 0, storing 0 in grior, gprior=0 anything along those lines and I'd have said ok then but I presumed I was missing out on some magical mode, considering GPRIOR does hold the bits for MODE 9-11 of GTIA.

 

 

 

Pete

[andym00]

It's got nothing to do with "bit patterns interact with the graphics data on the bus".

 

Not selecting a Priority scheme means the graphics and PMG data gets ORed in certain combinations.

 

23 colours, useful or not, is still 7 more than the C-64 is able to produce.

 

Good to see I was wrong.. Didn't expect much else really..

[PeteD]

It's got nothing to do with "bit patterns interact with the graphics data on the bus".

 

Not selecting a Priority scheme means the graphics and PMG data gets ORed in certain combinations.

 

23 colours, useful or not, is still 7 more than the C-64 is able to produce.

 

 

Absolutely no argument from me on the 23 colours but some argument about if usability is important, but like I've said before is this thread about games, possible games or hardware possibilites?

 

 

Pete

[MaPa]

Why the A8 coder decided to keep changing the bg colour instead of leaving it black I suppose is just personal taste. I think it looks better with bg always black, A8 they've obviously gone, "hey, we've got alllll these colours to chose one so let's choose a dark shade of whatever the rest of the screen is."

 

In 320x200 resolution you have only one color with two lumas, so you can't have black background and green,yellow,red or whatever pixels.

 

About GPRIOR 0 (only low nibble 0) mode. I used them in Crossover intro and New Year's Miracle demo for example (see my signature). You can do nice colourful tetris with shaded blocks at least

[PeteD]

One colour and 2 lumas seems a very weird way to design it, if it's getting a colour from the pf0 register why not one from bkg? Ahh well, as if I could design a computer I think I'd have stuck with a single colour background rather than have the whole display area keep changing.

 

 

 

Pete

Edited September 5, 2009 by PeteD

[oky2000]

It's got nothing to do with "bit patterns interact with the graphics data on the bus".

 

Not selecting a Priority scheme means the graphics and PMG data gets ORed in certain combinations.

 

23 colours, useful or not, is still 7 more than the C-64 is able to produce.

 

Here would be a good place to spell it out in non technical simple english for non A8 coders.

 

Max resolution/pixel accuracy across entire screen? 160x200? 320x200?

Any 23 colours?

Impact on CPU utilization?

Effect/reduction on available PM resources?

 

See while it is 7 more colours than the C64 when you use 16 colours in a C64 game you still have the following advantages...

 

No impact on theoretical maximum multiplexed sprites/sprites in the borders etc.

Minimal impact on CPU (16 colour screens via 2 colours per 4x8 pixel block is stock hardware mostly with a more effort to get 3rd and 4th colours up)

Minimal impact of scrolling these screens.

 

etc etc

 

For example could you make a 23 colour version of Last Ninja or Exploding Fist or IK+ or even a 23 colour conversion of say the C64 16 colour game Lifeforce/Salamander?

[STE'86]

It's got nothing to do with "bit patterns interact with the graphics data on the bus".

 

Not selecting a Priority scheme means the graphics and PMG data gets ORed in certain combinations.

 

23 colours, useful or not, is still 7 more than the C-64 is able to produce.

 

Here would be a good place to spell it out in non technical simple english for non A8 coders.

 

Max resolution/pixel accuracy across entire screen? 160x200? 320x200?

Any 23 colours?

Impact on CPU utilization?

Effect/reduction on available PM resources?

 

See while it is 7 more colours than the C64 when you use 16 colours in a C64 game you still have the following advantages...

 

No impact on theoretical maximum multiplexed sprites/sprites in the borders etc.

Minimal impact on CPU (16 colour screens via 2 colours per 4x8 pixel block is stock hardware mostly with a more effort to get 3rd and 4th colours up)

Minimal impact of scrolling these screens.

 

etc etc

 

For example could you make a 23 colour version of Last Ninja or Exploding Fist or IK+ or even a 23 colour conversion of say the C64 16 colour game Lifeforce/Salamander?

 

mate i wil be impressed if we get more than 5 on Fist with these poxy graphics limitations

Edited September 5, 2009 by STE'86

[PeteD]

The problem with this 23 colour thing is, as far as doing a game that mixes both in the same area of the screen, you've got to use the PMGs to create those extra colours so they're lost to the game, leaves software sprites. Not got any problem with that the A8 has that little extra grunt to at least do a few and there are some tricks to faster software sprites, but thats another discussion. BUT as soon as your software sprites go near those PMGs that are now creating the new colours they'll go all freakish.

 

I'd looked at it for Exploding Fist and realised within a few mins of trying to plan out a screen it was impossible. You could of course use the method in any area of screen that didnt need sprites of either PMG or software such as the top of the backgrounds on Fist/IK+ For porting purposes it's not worth it because it's not needed but if someone wanted to design a background for an IK+ type of game (and I'm hoping to do a Fist A8 in the future, 3 maaaybe 4 players but no crossing into the background ala IK) then you could use the method for that. Would a 23 colour background look much better than a 16 colour one? I have no way of finding out myself because I have the artistic skills of a 5 year old.

 

As far as "any 23 colours" no, and thats where it gets even harder to design the background because you have to start out with playfield colours that when ORed with the Player colours result in something sensible. It's a massive nightmare.

 

Pete

Edited September 5, 2009 by PeteD

[oky2000]

It's got nothing to do with "bit patterns interact with the graphics data on the bus".

 

Not selecting a Priority scheme means the graphics and PMG data gets ORed in certain combinations.

 

23 colours, useful or not, is still 7 more than the C-64 is able to produce.

but like I've said before is this thread about games, possible games or hardware possibilites?

 

 

Pete

 

Ultimately I would hope it's a quest to find the best features of each standard machine models sold at the time (so no SCPU/REU C64s or VBXE or 320kb A8s!), neither machine is perfect ALL 8bit (and most 16bit) home computers are a massive compromise. Features can be anything from the quality of the I/O routines (inc tape as well as disk turbos in software only so using standard hardware)

 

If new hardware tricks are discovered along the way for either then great...and this goes beyond sound and graphics tricks, things like a tape loading turbo routine in software was a painful MIA feature for A8 gamers in EU for one compared to other home computers of the time.

 

Existing games as an average don't always give a true picture, look at how absolutely pathetic most arcade conversions of Amiga games are, and yet in the hands of a talented coder the games can be as good as Sharp x68000 or Neo Geo games. Only takes a handful of examples of each machine being pushed to it's limits to see some potential (again the Amiga being the perfect example comparing Lotus Turbo Challenge II and Outrun or Chase HQ games of what is and what should have been!)

[STE'86]

It's got nothing to do with "bit patterns interact with the graphics data on the bus".

 

Not selecting a Priority scheme means the graphics and PMG data gets ORed in certain combinations.

 

23 colours, useful or not, is still 7 more than the C-64 is able to produce.

but like I've said before is this thread about games, possible games or hardware possibilites?

 

 

Pete

 

Ultimately I would hope it's a quest to find the best features of each standard machine models sold at the time (so no SCPU/REU C64s or VBXE or 320kb A8s!), neither machine is perfect ALL 8bit (and most 16bit) home computers are a massive compromise. Features can be anything from the quality of the I/O routines (inc tape as well as disk turbos in software only so using standard hardware)

 

If new hardware tricks are discovered along the way for either then great...and this goes beyond sound and graphics tricks, things like a tape loading turbo routine in software was a painful MIA feature for A8 gamers in EU for one compared to other home computers of the time.

 

Existing games as an average don't always give a true picture, look at how absolutely pathetic most arcade conversions of Amiga games are, and yet in the hands of a talented coder the games can be as good as Sharp x68000 or Neo Geo games. Only takes a handful of examples of each machine being pushed to it's limits to see some potential (again the Amiga being the perfect example comparing Lotus Turbo Challenge II and Outrun or Chase HQ games of what is and what should have been!)

 

 

yes but in 30 years there is not as far as i have seen not ONE viable playable game that looks as good as u lot insist it can and should.

 

i find this quite worrying when reading alll this "could be" "should be" "will be" posting

 

Steve

 

edit, this was not intended as a personal post to oky2000, i just wanted to use his paragraph about new methods and coders

Edited September 5, 2009 by STE'86

[PeteD]

What should be happening thanks to all this argument is people should be pooling resources. There are some good coders on this forum, people who know the hardware well enough to know the ins and outs of "mode 0" and even repeat PMGs in X, change colours etc etc for even more colours. People who are game coders, artists who know the limitations of the 23 colour thing and can draw stuff with that in mind, I'm sure there are some existing or budding game designers (one of whom seems obsessed with Last Ninja hehe). I think maybe nobody has the time but if 6 coders and 3 artist worked on it, one doing a pmg multiplexer or an optimised softsprite routine etc that spreads the load thin enough to only need a few hours a week, then maybe A8 "could" have some good new games.

 

 

Pete

[emkay]

Ultimately I would hope it's a quest to find the best features of each standard machine models sold at the time (so no SCPU/REU C64s or VBXE or 320kb A8s!), neither machine is perfect ALL 8bit (and most 16bit) home computers are a massive compromise. Features can be anything from the quality of the I/O routines (inc tape as well as disk turbos in software only so using standard hardware)

 

RAM is no option to disqualify.It's just like to say "C64 users is not allowed to use trackloaders" just because the A8 does not take that much benefit by this.

All machines, also C64, were created to use RAM/ROM expansions. C64 freaks tend to deny RAM expansions, because the C64 doesn't take much benefit by this...

[STE'86]

Ultimately I would hope it's a quest to find the best features of each standard machine models sold at the time (so no SCPU/REU C64s or VBXE or 320kb A8s!), neither machine is perfect ALL 8bit (and most 16bit) home computers are a massive compromise. Features can be anything from the quality of the I/O routines (inc tape as well as disk turbos in software only so using standard hardware)

 

RAM is no option to disqualify.It's just like to say "C64 users is not allowed to use trackloaders" just because the A8 does not take that much benefit by this.

All machines, also C64, were created to use RAM/ROM expansions. C64 freaks tend to deny RAM expansions, because the C64 doesn't take much benefit by this...

 

not really. its probably more to do with it not being an "out of the box" machine and a level playing field. having 5x the amount of RAM and then jumping up and down shouting how your game is far better than a 64 defeats the object somewhat. u may as well have written it on a next generation machine like an St or Amiga, as no machines of the A8/c64 vintage had this overwhelming advantage.

 

Steve

 

dont get me wrong i have no objection to anyone writing purely for 320k emu based A8s but getting insufferably smug that u finally "beat a 64" by doing it is a touch ludicrous.

[PeteD]

Ultimately I would hope it's a quest to find the best features of each standard machine models sold at the time (so no SCPU/REU C64s or VBXE or 320kb A8s!), neither machine is perfect ALL 8bit (and most 16bit) home computers are a massive compromise. Features can be anything from the quality of the I/O routines (inc tape as well as disk turbos in software only so using standard hardware)

 

RAM is no option to disqualify.It's just like to say "C64 users is not allowed to use trackloaders" just because the A8 does not take that much benefit by this.

All machines, also C64, were created to use RAM/ROM expansions. C64 freaks tend to deny RAM expansions, because the C64 doesn't take much benefit by this...

 

I agree WITH excluding ram over 64k because it shows what can be fit into a stock machine, or should it be 48k for Atari? just kidding.

 

Once again it brings into play the question of things like hardware vs software sprites because to speed up software sprite drawing you'd store them pre-shifted and that will eat your ram but unfortunatley for a game that requires lots of different moving objects that's the limitation.

 

The C64/1541 combination has always allowed loading, I don't see that being anything other than "stock" but I'd be happy to relinquish that for the 64k.

 

 

 

Pete

[emkay]

The C64/1541 combination has always allowed loading, I don't see that being anything other than "stock" but I'd be happy to relinquish that for the 64k.

 

And why should A8 deny the fact that it was built for page flipping RAM/ROM of the plugged cartridge, which can be several MB ?

Edited September 5, 2009 by emkay

[PeteD]

And the c64 has supercpu etc? You're allowing those too then? How many normal users have more than 64k? Where are these many mb cartridges? I thought to get even 320k you had to solder some stuff? I'm probably wrong on that point but even so we're talking "stock" machines. An 800 with drive vs a C64 with drive. If you can't live without the extra ram then it gives everyone the feeling you're hiding behind it for some reason.

 

 

 

Pete

[emkay]

Existing games as an average don't always give a true picture, look at how absolutely pathetic most arcade conversions of Amiga games are, and yet in the hands of a talented coder the games can be as good as Sharp x68000 or Neo Geo games. Only takes a handful of examples of each machine being pushed to it's limits to see some potential (again the Amiga being the perfect example comparing Lotus Turbo Challenge II and Outrun or Chase HQ games of what is and what should have been!)

 

What are you talking about, exactly? I want to see an X68000 quality game on my old AMIGA 2000

[emkay]

And the c64 has supercpu etc? You're allowing those too then? How many normal users have more than 64k? Where are these many mb cartridges? I thought to get even 320k you had to solder some stuff? I'm probably wrong on that point but even so we're talking "stock" machines. An 800 with drive vs a C64 with drive. If you can't live without the extra ram then it gives everyone the feeling you're hiding behind it for some reason.

 

 

 

Nonsense. The A8 was built for further RAM upgrades, and every cartridge has extra RAM/ROM so you can call it "stock" . It's a real feature. Plugging a Super CPU and or changing the chipset is really a self-deception.