atarian63 Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Today a real C64 classic. Atarians have tried very hard to copy or imitate this game but never managed to do so properly. For a fairer fight for that is a bit shite, there was a Uridium knock off by Tynesoft/Zeppelin that looked a bit better.. Still doubt it will meet Atarians 'they don't make'em like that anymore' golden years requirement Just went hunting.. It's Mirax Force I was thinking of, and it doesn't look much better in reality.. does look better, I'll have to try that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym00 Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 (edited) You know what, that A8 Uridium is a lot better than the other tat (no link to the name intended) that I'd seen before passing itself off as Uridium. I'd thought about a port as a future project but apart from doing the enemies as software sprites with PMGs as underlay to get the extra colour it's pretty much how it would turn out anyway. Not much you can do about the scrolling with the A8 stuck at colour clocks and not "hires" pixel scrolling. I've just been playing with HSCROLL tonight I had no idea it hid the screen under the 'imaginary' border when it scrolled.. Anyway.. God, that scrolling in colour clocks really blows whale sized chunks totally You can't do any really nice smooth scrolling on the thing unless it's batting past you at a ludicrous 2 pixels a frame.. I'm beginning to get why half vertical res was so popular on the horizontal shooters.. Not only less to draw (and all the free time back on the odd lines) but they get away with it because everything flys past before you can look at it.. Unacceptable Edited October 3, 2009 by andym00 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarian63 Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 some real fine c64 golf from the Atari golden age... Wha Wha Whaaaaa... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockford Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 You know what, that A8 Uridium is a lot better than the other tat (no link to the name intended) that I'd seen before passing itself off as Uridium. I'd thought about a port as a future project but apart from doing the enemies as software sprites with PMGs as underlay to get the extra colour it's pretty much how it would turn out anyway. Not much you can do about the scrolling with the A8 stuck at colour clocks and not "hires" pixel scrolling. Pete Even worse than that ? It must be a disaster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockford Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Today a real C64 classic. Atarians have tried very hard to copy or imitate this game but never managed to do so properly. For a fairer fight for that is a bit shite, there was a Uridium knock off by Tynesoft/Zeppelin that looked a bit better.. Still doubt it will meet Atarians 'they don't make'em like that anymore' golden years requirement Just went hunting.. It's Mirax Force I was thinking of, and it doesn't look much better in reality.. I've tested this one too. Slooooooow, booooooring, plays like s..t and not so close to original as Oxygene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym00 Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 some real fine c64 golf from the Atari golden age... Wha Wha Whaaaaa... Ummm, nothing wrong with that.. 4 colours @ 320x200.. So out of the A8s ball-park totally I can see the A8 port of that already.. It'll be 2 shades, dark green with a lighter green and a square golf-ball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockford Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Today a real C64 classic. Atarians have tried very hard to copy or imitate this game but never managed to do so properly. 33 - URIDIUM / OXYGENE C64 C64 C64 On C64 this game is a perfectly crafted masterpiece. Everything is MUCH BETTER: graphics, sprites, colours, music & sound, scrolling, handling. The Atari version has poor sprites, horrible handling and jerky scrolling. Even though many things were cut off (mothership, flying mines, final destruction etc.) it works slower . What's more, on A8 there are only 8 levels (all of them in grey colour ). C64 proves its superiority again. ATARI ATARI ATARI copyright 1988... Rockford does not learn.. You are not a good learner, aren't you ? What would you say if tomorrow I posted another game from "golden era of Atari" ? Bad programming.... again ? Don't be so cocky sir ROTFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockford Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 BTW, the remaining copies of Uridium on A8: Astromeda, Vanadium and Thunderfox. All of them are shity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oky2000 Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 (edited) As nice as the hand drawn stuff on either machine is it is connected to the talent of the artist and avoiding the restrictions of any fancy screen. IF you want to have a real comparison I suggest we pick 4 real world images and rescale them down to 320x20 and then you recreate the image using any tools and trick screen modes you know of and post the results BUT you must supply a D64/PRG and an ATR for either machine so we can see what it looks like on a real TV or either output of an emulator (pictures of what these pictures are supposed to look like and the output of a real machine are never quite the same...especially with palette switching/interlaced stuff) Fair? An example picture could be either the classic parrot... stuff like that. The reason being that hand drawn/fantasy pictures can't give you an accurate use of colours merely artistic licence. This way you can decide if resolution OR greater colour depth is more important and the effects both those compromises in design have in each machine's attempt to render realistic real world images. Right....get your thinking caps on we need four real world images/photographs to use as a test bed. My reasoning is that it is a good way to test out a machines abilities for static pictures and here is the Wikipedia entry which inspired me (no A8 and all the screen modes are 100% stock abilities of each machine tested with no trick modes but I want to see trick modes and the A8 included. I may edit the Wiki page if people BEHAVE THEMSELVES ) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_8-bit_computer_hardware_palettes Edited October 3, 2009 by oky2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oky2000 Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 BTW, the remaining copies of Uridium on A8: Astromeda, Vanadium and Thunderfox. All of them are shity Thunderfox is from Atari themselves isn't it? After all that talk about who has the biggest lightpen in the static graphics department I never thought I'd be so relieved to see Rockford posting aha ha! I've seen all those games and decided it's unfair to bring up Uridium though. What I will say is Andrew Braybrook (used to see him all the time where I worked and spoke to him a couple of times in Woolies haha) is a really skilled programmer, and an expert on the C64. Reading some of his developer diaries at the time was fascinating. Morpheus is a fantastic game and I think it was his last. The graphics on the were just not what you expected from a C64 it was such a classy game. And all 1 man games too. His attention to detail in Uridium is evident in the super fast AND smooth scrolling routines. To be fair even IF the A8 could replicate that game perfectly you would need to put one of the best programmers known to man to achieve it anyway...looks simple but definitely is not. As an example check out the Spectrum port, they did their best and the programmer technically did a stunning job but that too is nowhere compared to the original version. Oh and just so people know...on the C128 it detects the 2mhz CPU and uses it on a later released edition too so it's even better! (I only add that because the 130XE and 800XL/65XE are identical bar the extra 64k RAM, the C128 and C64 are not identical machines...far from it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allas Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 It's fair. Better still if pictures can posted with PNG emulator screenshot and a JPG real picture what we can see on real TV. Emulator screenshot doesn't look like on real TV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allas Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 I propose this picture too: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarian63 Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Today a real C64 classic. Atarians have tried very hard to copy or imitate this game but never managed to do so properly. For a fairer fight for that is a bit shite, there was a Uridium knock off by Tynesoft/Zeppelin that looked a bit better.. Still doubt it will meet Atarians 'they don't make'em like that anymore' golden years requirement Just went hunting.. It's Mirax Force I was thinking of, and it doesn't look much better in reality.. I've tested this one too. Slooooooow, booooooring, plays like s..t and not so close to original as Oxygene So.. kind of like a c64 game then huh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarian63 Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 (edited) Umm c64 looks terrible, typical of the time period. Amazing it ever caught on.. Edited October 4, 2009 by atarian63 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarian63 Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Today a real C64 classic. Atarians have tried very hard to copy or imitate this game but never managed to do so properly. 33 - URIDIUM / OXYGENE C64 C64 C64 On C64 this game is a perfectly crafted masterpiece. Everything is MUCH BETTER: graphics, sprites, colours, music & sound, scrolling, handling. The Atari version has poor sprites, horrible handling and jerky scrolling. Even though many things were cut off (mothership, flying mines, final destruction etc.) it works slower . What's more, on A8 there are only 8 levels (all of them in grey colour ). C64 proves its superiority again. ATARI ATARI ATARI copyright 1988... Rockford does not learn.. You are not a good learner, aren't you ? What would you say if tomorrow I posted another game from "golden era of Atari" ? Bad programming.... again ? Don't be so cocky sir ROTFL Wow a recycle of my statement to you a week or so ago... A bit slow on the uptake there Rocky. You are getting one thing.. the examples few though they are... give examples of bad programming on A8. So you have proven you can learn,albiet slowly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+CharlieChaplin Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 (edited) Err Rockford, wait - you should not compare a commercial game (Uridium on the C64) with a PD/freeware game (Oxygene) on the A8... Why not compare Uridium (C64) with Uridium (A8, Rino marketing or something similar completely unknown). The C64 will easily win here too... http://www.mushca.com/f/atari/index.php?dl=092 Besides, the Tynesoft and Zeppelin versions of Mirax Force have different (4-colour) title versions, the one shown here was the one from Zeppelin games. Last not least there is also "The Last Guardian" a follow-up to Mirax Force, scrolling vertically. Since I do not like the Uridium types at all, it simply does not matter to me if anyone says the A8 or the C64 versions are better - I never play them actually... or to give all your comparisons a halt: All C64 games are better - but I never play on C64 (I don`t have one), so it simply does not matter to me ! -Andreas Koch. Edited October 4, 2009 by CharlieChaplin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atariksi Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 ... Poor programming again, probably some c64 programmer not knowing A8. You have a talent for finding the few that exist. You have to be carefully with his reviews since he is biased fanatic of C64 so sees nothing advantageous on Atari's side even the palette and CPU. So some games although rated by him as poor are actually better technically than C64 versions. You are right,even when the issues on both side have been covered here endlessly he continues on. Indeed very sad... So, Castle Wolfenstein is better on A8.... LOL atariksi can even prove that water isn't wet and grass isn't green and even that Rocford is a biased idiot... What a distinct sign of helplessness I love you too Just the facts He over-did it and gave himself away with "ugly colors on A8" and other incorrect statements as if it was better for Atari to use the C64 palette. Any sane person will do his own review rather than listen to his biased fanatical views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atariksi Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 ... So, the connection back to this thread is I completely agree with the C64 being accessable in this way. Both the 320 pixel and 160 pixel modes are really easy. It's a matter of basic hardware setup and put data on the screen. I've always liked this, and think that color cells are just great. Simple things are really simple, ... ... It's easy for putting colored text on the screen not for graphics. Try drawing a line and rotating it-- much easier on A8 and CGA (PC). Graphics modes are meant for easy graphics not for easy colored text. Graphics involves pictures and motion. Since it's an extension of the text mode hardware, I guess it was cheaper to go that way even at cost of those dreaded 40+ consecutive cycles. The fact that graphics hardware have been linear since that time shows it is the inferior approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atariksi Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 The Commodore 1541 (by far, the most common drive in the US) is the drive known for knocking itself out of alignment. That's the weird thing... people keep saying that about the breeze block 1541, but the two i've got on my desk have never needed aligning once (i occasionally remember to clean the heads) and it's not as though i've wrapped them in cotton wool or anything like that either, i'm rough on my hardware and they've had more than their fair share of use over the years. You can't generalize from your case to prove the point that 1541s don't require aligning. You need to find some global statistic. I have a 1571 that requires aligning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atariksi Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 some real fine c64 golf from the Atari golden age... Wha Wha Whaaaaa... Ummm, nothing wrong with that.. 4 colours @ 320x200.. So out of the A8s ball-park totally I can see the A8 port of that already.. It'll be 2 shades, dark green with a lighter green and a square golf-ball Looks like you had lots of spare time today and shamelessly picking on non-programmer with your biased incorrect views of Atari hardware capabilities. If you are so much into higher resolution, you were better off with a PC CGA machine that does 640*200 and 320*200 in linear fashion. You also would have gotten a bigger color RAM in 80*25 text extendible to graphics modes and 16 color palette. As a bonus, you would have gotten linear graphics. One graphics mode does not make a machine. And your graphics mode isn't exactly 16 colors for any pixel not even at 160*200. You are wrong here as already demonstrated many times-- Atari can do more than 2 colors in Graphics 8. Leaving aside, DLI-based changes, here's a simple BASIC example that even you can understand: 10 PRINT "Atari BASIC program to show Player/PF ORing w/GPRIOR colors in 320*200" 20 PRINT "By Krishna Software Inc." 30 GRAPHICS 8 40 POKE 704,16:POKE 705,32:POKE 706,130:POKE 707,132:POKE 623,32+16 50 POKE 710,136:POKE 711,232 60 COLOR 1:PLOT 256,0:DR. 256,159:PLOT 258,0:DR. 258,159 70 PLOT 265,0:DR. 265,159:PLOT 267,0:DR. 267,159:PLOT 0,0:DR.319,159 80 FOR T=53256 TO 53265:POKE T,255:N.T 90 POKE 53248,108:POKE 53249,124:POKE 53250,160:POKE 53251,176 100 POKE 53252,168:POKE 53253,184:POKE 53254,200:POKE 53255,152 RUN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atariksi Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 ... Poor programming again, probably some c64 programmer not knowing A8. You have a talent for finding the few that exist. You have to be carefully with his reviews since he is biased fanatic of C64 so sees nothing advantageous on Atari's side even the palette and CPU. So some games although rated by him as poor are actually better technically than C64 versions. You are right,even when the issues on both side have been covered here endlessly he continues on. Indeed very sad... I think the saying goes something like "You can fool some of the people all the time, all of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atariksi Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Look, I'm not following this discussion, all 384 pages of it. But I will tell you this. When I want to play classic computer games I use my C64. ... Bad decision (given your reasons below), but everyone has their independence to choose. There are two reasons. The main one is that 8-bit disk drives that work without repair or rehab are uncommon. I don't have the chops to get them all going, or the time. I rarely have trouble with 1701 drives. As I understand it, 8-bit Atari drives tend to need alignment and other maintenance. ... "As I understand it" indicates you aren't really sure. There's also PC interfaces that will give you warp speed access to the software. The second reason is that the C64 was more popular, or at least the software is more readily available, and I happen to have found a ton of it. I wish I had found the same amount of 8-bit disks, but I simply haven't. I think that Atari disk soft is generally harder to find. ... You can find software easily for Apple II and there's many titles that are popular, but that doesn't necessarily make it better. Many people smoke but that doesn't mean smoking is good for you. I would rather use Atari software and play games on my Atari computers, but I limit that to cartridges for the above reasons. And I boot up my C64 for most of my disk retrogaming needs. Shameful, isn't it? It's too bad for you. Not everyone can get diamonds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atariksi Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Atari with VBXE2 - yes, naturally that's going to blow the C64 away. But we should expect that with such a fundamental hardware enhancement. Of course, but we're not arguing recent video systems being strapped to the machines (well okay, we are to a degree with the GTIA modes since they weren't bolted in until a few years after the machine went out) and the C64 camp simply took it in another direction and produced enhanced versions of the entire machine. Commodore 64 SIDs have several versions but worse yet the older Commodore machines weren't even backward compatible. At least A8 had only one 8-bit machine series so anyone upgrading has a much easier job-- just plug in the GTIA chip or it was already done on most A400s and A800s (prior to your C64). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atariksi Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 The C64 is lucky to have so many excellent artists dedicated to making great pixel art on it, the A8 seems to lack the dedicated pixel pushers sadly... Devil's advocaat for a moment, perhaps more artists went for the C64 because it's the more flexible machine to work with... Just like perhaps the moon is made of cheddar cheese. Doesn't boot, slower than A8, lesser palette, text-based graphics made, not-even graphics commands in it's BASIC, etc. -- so much flexibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atariksi Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 ... on c64). Image is in MUSC mode. Yes of course more colors on Atari 800 to choose from but this c64 example you have twice the horizontal resolution and with the inclusion of pal mixing, more colors than the 16! The second picture are two multicolor pictures by mermaid but fed through the converter and displaying 2 pictures simultaneously in hires. Ofcourse quality is even better now as image has been specifically drawn for c64. Bear in mind that these pictures are NON interlaced. I would like to see the Atari display high resolution with this many colors. Does not matter if Atari has hundreds or so of colors to choose from. The limited resolution is a great disadvantage They look like crap on the C64 version. Palette reduction screwed up the quality. Color loss is more of a disadvantage. Don't try your bullcrap of differentiating resolution and colors -- both are integral to images and imagery that occurs naturally or in most paintings requires many many shades and colors. So stop the bullcrap of "does not matter if Atari has hundreds of colors". You are just speculating. 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