PeteD Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Well that's ok, ANY code on ANY machine EVER. Not write some new stuff specifically to placate me. Just show me anything you've written or had published or have even proof you wrote something. If you have then good, I'll have a "bit" more respect for you, but you still come out with nonsense most of the time eg asking me to show you my code so you can tell me how many cycles it uses, then asking how I'd like it, in indexed or zp. Surely that's not a sensible question to ask when you think about it? Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Games are written for the players and who would know better than the supplier back in the day? Games were yes, demos were not and that's what emkay and i were talking about on a technical level (or he was failing to, more accurately) when you replied to me. Sorry, this really isn't your field in the slightest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 No wonder there are so many more coders on c64, it's got freaks, nerds, chimps, ... You're correct. And it was discussed in the thread before. C64 was easier to code on. So what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteD Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 No wonder there are so many more coders on c64, it's got freaks, nerds, chimps, ... You're correct. And it was discussed in the thread before. C64 was easier to code on. So what? I surrender, it's just not worth it.. lol Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potatohead Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Games are written for the players and who would know better than the supplier back in the day? Games were yes, demos were not and that's what emkay and i were talking about on a technical level (or he was failing to, more accurately) when you replied to me. Sorry, this really isn't your field in the slightest. Yep, I've got to second that. The scene really is a different thing altogether. Also I've got to point out that does in no way diminish being involved at other levels, sales, service, support, etc... It's important to recognize the difference, and that is why I posted what I did. It's important because those that participate in scenes do so for their reasons, and those reasons are often quite different than outsiders would assume they are. I don't know of any better way to express that, so I'll just leave my comments to stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 [quote name='TMR' date='Sun Oct 4, 2009 9:50 PM' Now that I know the pointer function, it shows that a chimp can write games on the C64. And that's three for three because it would take someone who hasn't even the vaguest clue to come out with some idiocy like that. Or it shows that even you have a hard job doing programs ? Look at Sheddy. If he was discussing this nonsene this far, he never would have reached to build Space Harrier THAT far. He's just doing it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Also I've got to point out that does in no way diminish being involved at other levels, sales, service, support, etc... To clarify, i'd be a wazzock to say it did because i did over a decade of sales myself back in the day... i can't be any more specific, it's just a happy blur in my memory these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 I surrender, it's just not worth it.. lol Really? Facts make you surrender? Interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STE'86 Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Damn. what a devastating loss to a8 coding that is. do we take it the 3d dropzone has been shelved then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym00 Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 I surrender, it's just not worth it.. lol Life's easier (and this thread more readable) if all you see of those two muppets is: "This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by emkay." 24 hours of not seeing anything from monkey boy has been sheer bliss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Damn. what a devastating loss to a8 coding that is. do we take it the 3d dropzone has been shelved then? Reality must be hard for you, but the coding of that 3D Dropzone is a reality of your C64 washed brain. Not the real thing just like real colours and music above 3.5kHz. So, take it easy ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteD Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 (edited) I surrender, it's just not worth it.. lol Really? Facts make you surrender? Interesting. What facts? the nonsense that comes out of your head again that somehow links to the current conversation? Yes, those ones make me surrender. Just to make it clear to you. C64, or any machine isn't EASIER to code on. According to you lot the A8 is the superior machine thanks to its faster CPU and taller "sprites" etc etc. What's been proven over and over in the thread is that the A8 coders couldn't be bothered to write decent games because it wasn't worth the hassle. Pete Edited October 4, 2009 by PeteD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potatohead Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 (edited) Also I've got to point out that does in no way diminish being involved at other levels, sales, service, support, etc... To clarify, i'd be a wazzock to say it did because i did over a decade of sales myself back in the day... i can't be any more specific, it's just a happy blur in my memory these days. Sales is a grim reality in this world. Sometimes it can be avoided. Often it can't. Truth is, asking for money is just as difficult as bending hardware to your will is. It's a different skill, and one that takes some effort to obtain mastery of, and even more difficult to practice well. I've personally closed $100K plus deals and have sweated as much over that as I did getting my text driver up and running well. You know there is a nice buzz that happens after either of those activities, and that buzz is the same. I like to think we all do the stuff we really like to do, or rise to the challenge of what we have to do, in search that buzz. So, can we just set this aside? Today everybody is here because we like the stuff, be it Atari stuff, or some other old, croddy, retro stuff. There are no chimps, etc... There are just machines and amazingly, if you stop to think about it, people somehow still interested in doing things with them, and even more amazingly, new and improved stuff being done with them. I'll shut up now, but for this: Just was hoping we could circle back around to some of the better elements of this thread. You guys know I check in on this each day. It's a guilty pleasure really. From time to time, I can add something, so I do. A lot of the time, it's good to just read and learn, or laugh. Betcha others are doing the same. Edit: @Andym00, your user picture (sorry, I can't say avatar, because... well, just because an avatar is supposed to be more than a picture --another day, another thread) is great. I've set that option and it's great. Once in a while, I'll take a peek, just as a sanity check, so that I can reconsider later down the road... Edited October 4, 2009 by potatohead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Life's easier (and this thread more readable) if all you see of those two muppets is: "This post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore posts by emkay." 24 hours of not seeing anything from monkey boy has been sheer bliss Small dumb children put their hands before their eyes, because they think they will not be seen while they see nothing. Nothing more to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STE'86 Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 (edited) Damn. what a devastating loss to a8 coding that is. do we take it the 3d dropzone has been shelved then? Reality must be hard for you, but the coding of that 3D Dropzone is a reality of your C64 washed brain. Not the real thing just like real colours and music above 3.5kHz. So, take it easy ... Not reality? surely not? but u discussed it so eloquently a few pages back. u made it sound so easy i thought it would only take u a couple of weeks. and i was SO looking forward to seeing it. also the sequel to your hangman game with presumably 256 colours in full screen with 11khz sampled mp3 soundtrack. assuming of course u could find another Bob Stevenson image to rip off and use in it. (u did of course realise that image was "Juno" that u used and originated on the terribly rubbish c64 hardware? and with all that classy a8 art to choose from too. shame on u. carry on Steve Edited October 4, 2009 by STE'86 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Now that I know the pointer function, it shows that a chimp can write games on the C64. And that's three for three because it would take someone who hasn't even the vaguest clue to come out with some idiocy like that. Or it shows that even you have a hard job doing programs ? Every programmer who does something new or different has a hard time writing programs; that's the whole point emkay, you consistently fail to give any of those programmers their due on the C64 and indeed the A8 and the reason you're failing is because you're not able to understand what is being done. The offer to count PeteD's cycles for him was a particularly ridiculous move, a chimp could do that given enough time. Look at Sheddy. If he was discussing this nonsene this far, he never would have reached to build Space Harrier THAT far. He's just doing it.... Y'see, that's you guessing yet again; i've been writing code for half of today and only stopping to visit AA when i'm taking a bit of a break or waiting for the kettle to boil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Just to make it clear to you. C64, or any machine isn't EASIER to code on. According to you lot the A8 is the superior machine thanks to its faster CPU and taller "sprites" etc etc. What's been proven over and over in the thread is that the A8 coders couldn't be bothered to write decent games because it wasn't worth the hassle. Put your brain on.... then start writing. The most games on the C64 ARE based on a scrolling screen with moving sprites. You can learn this in half an hour to code. That's also why many "homebrew" games on the C64 look professional. There is not much to go deeper into coding. Doing the same stuff on the A8, particular carmode based, gets harder logically. It's the same with SID music. You just have to use the registers of the SID with the "musical" notes, and everything will be played correct. POKEY has much more technical problems to solve. Starting with the 8 bit resolution for notes and ending with interfering problems between the channels. For both you have to write the correct routines in software, to come into the range of using it just like set x,y move x,y .... The problem on the A8 is not mainly with the CPU, it's more a RAM problem, because those "software subroutines" cost additional RAM. And so on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteD Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Just to make it clear to you. C64, or any machine isn't EASIER to code on. According to you lot the A8 is the superior machine thanks to its faster CPU and taller "sprites" etc etc. What's been proven over and over in the thread is that the A8 coders couldn't be bothered to write decent games because it wasn't worth the hassle. Put your brain on.... then start writing. The most games on the C64 ARE based on a scrolling screen with moving sprites. You can learn this in half an hour to code. That's also why many "homebrew" games on the C64 look professional. There is not much to go deeper into coding. Doing the same stuff on the A8, particular carmode based, gets harder logically. It's the same with SID music. You just have to use the registers of the SID with the "musical" notes, and everything will be played correct. POKEY has much more technical problems to solve. Starting with the 8 bit resolution for notes and ending with interfering problems between the channels. For both you have to write the correct routines in software, to come into the range of using it just like set x,y move x,y .... The problem on the A8 is not mainly with the CPU, it's more a RAM problem, because those "software subroutines" cost additional RAM. And so on... Oh dude, you're doing it again, more nonsense based on 1/2 learned facts. it's a scrolling game with sprites so it's easy ROFL The A8 (in case you didn't know) can do scrolling for free (especially in charmode) and it's one of the easiest machines to do scrolling on. It then has cpu left to do everything else that the C64 now has had to do a whole screen move in a frame. SID, no, you don't just use notes and it plays correctly, go write a SID music routine. Please stop because my face hurts from laughing. Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thealgorithm Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 (edited) ... but why would it want to be a replica of that? ... Maybe you like a replica of this: That is horrible quality. Are you sure you have not seen what the C64 has to offer? I am sure if you did, you would not post a picture like this. The below is from my MUSC converter (and bear in mind that this only has sprite underlay) FLI in combination with this would look FAR better. It looks terrible and can't be compared to REAL colors. This is a spatial dither job (worse than temporal dither) and if you see it the way it is meant to be seen (full screen on TV), you will see those dithered colors. Now if you shrink it and see it as a small window, you don't see the ugly dither patterns. I would think the one posted in post #9499 looks better and that can also be enhanced further. The point I am making is you can't real colors with dithered colors. Wrong. Display on TV set and the colors will mix. It would actually be vice versa on TV set (Will look better) I would prefer dithering over blocky pixels anyday. I have yet to see any atari gfx mode look better than what is offered on the c64. The recent example pics have nice color selection of course, but so darn blocky. C64 images win hands down. But not to say that Atari does not have potential. I am sure its capable of something but I have not seen it yet You are wrong and just speculating like a C64 fanboy. If colors will mix, then show the color mixed version why are you posting an image that's non-representative of the actual image. You are just blurting out C64 wins hands down because you are PASSING JUDGEMENT according to what you think it should be like. You don't even understand that having REAL colors is better than spatially dithered colors. Perhaps, you need to pick up some books on image processing rather than speculate. You have shown images when their representative on A8 don't exist and you haven't even shown the exact image. People have to guess whether it's PAL mixing, artifacting, or emulator snap-shot. Stop the rubbish "I am sure it's capable of something." You are misjudging the paintings-- they look more beautiful with the bigger palette. Of course, you have not seen better results on A8 because you are NOT looking at the painting but complaining about whether it's hi-res or not and discarding the color content. By the way, your images are spatially dithered on both axes-- don't you think that is self-contradictory to your remark that you are looking only for hi-res images? You are like some clown who claims he's digging for gold, but already has made up his mind that it must be in the Sahara desert. I had previously posted both the non pal blending picture and pal blending picture. Overall Lets just say that the quality is determined by the final outcome. Would everyone agree? All i have seen from this entire forum are Atari 800 images that look total crap. Show me an image on Atari 800 that betters the images I have posted? I would love to see Atari 800 display images at the same quality. For additional evidence I have even posted the executable (and that was for just the standard Mucsu mode) View that on a C64 and quality looks even more superior to the screenshots posted! Real colors are better than spatially dithered colors but Only if you have the resolution and able to display a considerable amount of colors in a given area. I would rather prefer a 320x200 image in 16 colors than a blocky washed out 80/160x And ofcourse looking at all the screenshots I want you to post an image which looks as good or better then the c64 offering. At the end, the final outcome is how the image looks regardless of how many colors a machine may have. Secondly I have looked at the image. I dont care whether it contains more colors, the final outcome like i said is the Final result of how it looks like on the machine regardless of what gfx mode its in. Does not matter whether its lores/hires etc. Rather than say what is better or not, why dont you do something productive and code something that shows what the Atari is capable of. Unlike you, I can code my own converters/demos and other applications. I am sure if you had the necessary knowledge you would be able to back up your claim instead of just ranting on without evidence. A challenge for you. Show me an image which beats the images i posted with atari800xl executable. We are waiting.. Yes, I have repeated myself a few times here. but thats just to drill it into your head Edited October 4, 2009 by thealgorithm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 also the sequel to your hangman game with presumably 256 colours in full screen with 11khz sampled mp3 soundtrack. assuming of course u could find another Bob Stevenson image to rip off and use in it. (u did of course realise that image was "Juno" that u used and originated on the terribly rubbish c64 hardware? and with all that classy a8 art to choose from too. shame on u. You don't have even a clou. It has something to do with my decision, not to do any programming on the A8 anymore. But, you are right in the case that the pics I used were from demos and riptros on the A8. I also used them for some converting stuff with a self written converter: Later I made a hand redraw of an Amiga screen which I saw in a related magazine.... Both pictures use 7 DLIs, just for changing the charbase. The colours should keep fixed there. The idea simply was to have the most colors on the screen with the least possible CPU consumption in this resolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thealgorithm Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 (edited) also the sequel to your hangman game with presumably 256 colours in full screen with 11khz sampled mp3 soundtrack. assuming of course u could find another Bob Stevenson image to rip off and use in it. (u did of course realise that image was "Juno" that u used and originated on the terribly rubbish c64 hardware? and with all that classy a8 art to choose from too. shame on u. You don't have even a clou. It has something to do with my decision, not to do any programming on the A8 anymore. But, you are right in the case that the pics I used were from demos and riptros on the A8. I also used them for some converting stuff with a self written converter: Later I made a hand redraw of an Amiga screen which I saw in a related magazine.... Both pictures use 7 DLIs, just for changing the charbase. The colours should keep fixed there. The idea simply was to have the most colors on the screen with the least possible CPU consumption in this resolution. What are the limitations of the Atari800's Hires Mode. Edited October 4, 2009 by thealgorithm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockford Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 Today another highly rated classic from the "golden era of Atari"....especially for atarian63 34 - AUTODUEL C64 C64 C64 The C64 version has better graphics and colours. The Atari version is ugly and monochrome, unless you happen to have an ntsc machine haunted by beautiful artifact blinking C64 is better again. ATARI ATARI ATARI 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 (edited) The A8 (in case you didn't know) can do scrolling for free (especially in charmode) and it's one of the easiest machines to do scrolling on. It then has cpu left to do everything else that the C64 now has had to do a whole screen move in a frame. You have to copy the screen content from time to time, but the sprites can be set by just using x and y coordinates, and for the face of the sprites you have to set the memory where the content has to be read... well, a really hard bread Pixel exact softwaresprites need much more effort. Saving the background, rolling the bits of the moved object, setting the visiual bits onscreen, writing back the background content... and so on. You also have to check the offset of the rolled content, if you want pixel exact collission controls. If you use the sprites of the C64 "out of the book" it does all by itself. It also has a collission detection. Ok, not that good as the A8, but it helps to find the correct collision when it happened. SID, no, you don't just use notes and it plays correctly, go write a SID music routine. SID has ALL that is needed to write music. The defined notation range, the self running ADSR control, and so on. You only have to know what values resemble the wanted results. Please stop because my face hurts from laughing. Pete You laugh over your own dumbness? Interesting again. Edited October 4, 2009 by emkay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potatohead Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 (edited) Run that game on NTSC, or without S-video, and it looks a whole lot better. Artifacting is used on the Atari and Apple ports of AUTO DUEL. "Lord British" -- Origin systems, made heavy use of artifacting because Apple was one of their supported platforms. Many of their titles could have been better on both Atari and C64, had the hardware been used a bit more. BTW: Many of the better screens in their titles looked great on Apple, because of how it did color. When a title is meant to be monochrome, something other than the vertical stripes is normally used to texture the screen, just FYI for future (false) comparisons. Neither machine (Atari or C64 is used to anywhere near it's potential on this particular title.) Edited October 4, 2009 by potatohead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteD Posted October 4, 2009 Share Posted October 4, 2009 (edited) The A8 (in case you didn't know) can do scrolling for free (especially in charmode) and it's one of the easiest machines to do scrolling on. It then has cpu left to do everything else that the C64 now has had to do a whole screen move in a frame. You have to copy the screen content from time to time, but the sprites can be set by just using x and y coordinates, and for the face of the sprites you have to set the memory where the content has to be read... well, a really hard bread Pixel exact softwaresprites need much more effort. Saving the background, rolling the bits of the moved object, setting the visiual bits onscreen, writing back the background content... and so on. You also have to check the offset of the rolled content, if you want pixel exact collission controls. If you use the sprites of the C64 "out of the book" it does all by itself. It also has a collission detection. Ok, not that good as the A8, but it helps to find the correct collision when it happened. SID, no, you don't just use notes and it plays correctly, go write a SID music routine. SID has ALL that is needed to write music. The defined notation range, the self running ADSR control, and so on. You only have to know what values reselmble the wanted results. Please stop because my face hurts from laughing. Pete You laugh over your own dumbness? Interesting again. You're mistaking the ease of doing certain things (setting an X/Y coorinate) with ease of programming a game. There's no more difficulty in setting a PMG X coordinate and moving a bit of data for the Y. Software sprites are admittedly harder but they're done on the C64 as well and once you've written one you can reuse it as if it was a hardware sprite routine. SID may have an accurate note range and an adsr but you still have to USE it. SID "routines" tend to be quite optimised and complex bits of code to get the best sounds from the hardware, nobody just pokes in a note and a "self running" adsr any more. Same thing applies again, write a working POKEY routine and you're done, use it over and over. None of that applies to how hard it is to write a GAME. You're also basing your whole argument on scrolling/sprite games. Something that is only part of the library on C64 or A8. How much easier is it to write a 3D routine on A8 or an isometric game like the Ultimate ones, or Barbarian which I believe uses software sprites on C64 (although the A8 version is dire in comparison that's just the coders fault), or Ballblazer etc etc. I suppose that's different, those games don't count? It's also highly amusing how all this C64 hardware suddenly becomes so much better than it was over the last 390 pages. Now the hardware collision register isn't so bad, and the sprites are great, and well, SID, oh my!! We can all clearly see who is dumb one, the one who constantly resorts to insults in EVERY post because they can't discuss like an adult. Pete Edited October 4, 2009 by PeteD 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