emkay Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 colours in these pictures, you know, just for kicks. These are from the game, right.. ? Oh boy... ROTFL C64 13 colours A800 17 colours Even due the enemy is missing on the A8 and the sky uses the same colours as the walls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 i've just had a thought about why the graphics were redrawn, if the C64 version's font was using over 128 characters it wouldn't have been possible to port it directly without trying to rejuggle character use and it may well be that there simply wasn't the space. You know that you're talking about a simple horizontal scrolling game. Any thougts about "character juggling" is wasting thoughts. It's not wasted, but you do need to plan ahead quite a distance because of the 128 character font. At a push i reckon i could get almost all the C64 backgrounds into the A8 and have them work correctly but it'd probably take 3K of character graphics rather than 2K and add a couple of extra DLIs to the mix on top of what is already there. i can probably get the clouds to be white as well though, the A8 version currently relies on a DLI and the fact that there's no detail to the mountains but if the clouds use the %11 colour after porting they can have the extra character colour. (The C64 could've done them in white, bad programming blah blah. =-) Pretty much all 8-bits do that on object movement, at least the ones synchronised to the screen refresh like the C64 and A8 do; if the objects in Mirax Force start going faster, the value being subtracted from their X position has been increased and they're moving in bigger steps. We know that. But appearently Rockford was mixing "faster" with "raw" gameplay. "C64 Games often get faster by using bigger steps for the movement" has nothing to do with gameplay at all. But the A8 version is apparently running at 25FPS, that can have a negative effect on a game where timing is important if the program is being hobbled back to that speed rather than just the scrolling (i have no idea right now, i'm at work so can't find out) and there are other ways that the speed of a game can vary rather than refresh speed, things like control response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 This one is using better code, it seems.... Wayout for 2 players on one Atari.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockford Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 (edited) colours in these pictures, you know, just for kicks. These are from the game, right.. ? Oh boy... ROTFL C64 13 colours A800 17 colours Even due the enemy is missing on the A8 and the sky uses the same colours as the walls. A800 17 colours ? WTF ? Edited October 16, 2009 by Rockford Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heaven/TQA Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 jesus... do we now again grab out games from 1977? unfortunatly I have not found Capture the Flag for the c64... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Again wrong here. Right again here because... The Atari version is one year older. The coder has learned in that time to make some things better on the C64. It's similar to Rescue on Fractalus. ...1983 was within the first year after the C64 was released, if saying "it's not part of the golden age" is somehow a valid catch-all argument after 1985 for the A8, then saying "1983 was too early" is equally valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heaven/TQA Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 when porting Aleksi's Venus Express I simply added another LSR to compensate the hscroll issue. in Venus it did not effect the gameplay but f.e. in games like Fort Apocalypse or Zeppelin? can we compare these 2 ones as both exist on both machines and were released similar times and were considered as both triple a games... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
analmux Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 ...C64 Games often get faster by using bigger steps for the movement, to compensate the slower CPU. Pretty much all 8-bits do that on object movement, at least the ones synchronised to the screen refresh like the C64 and A8 do; if the objects in Mirax Force start going faster, the value being subtracted from their X position has been increased and they're moving in bigger steps. Yes, but comparing A8 and C64 in this situation: When increasing the needed CPU processing the C64 would f.e. need to drop framerate from 25 fps to 12 fps, but the A8 can still keep 25 fps, and needs to drop to 12 fps far later. Of course all computers have limits, even PC's of nowadays, but what the heck does that matter? It's just a general statement. Not that I want to flame you, but to me this just sounds like double standards. When somewhere in this thread someone says something postive for C64 or something negative for A8 I don't hear you. But when it's the other way around, here comes TMR. Suppose someone says: "But in the A8 version of this game there are only 5 sprites per scanline, and on the C64 version 8", I could say "yes true, argument accepted", or do it the TMR way: "Yes, but ALL 8bit computers have limits of sprites per scanline". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 We know that. But appearently Rockford was mixing "faster" with "raw" gameplay. "C64 Games often get faster by using bigger steps for the movement" has nothing to do with gameplay at all. But the A8 version is apparently running at 25FPS, that can have a negative effect on a game where timing is important if the program is being hobbled back to that speed rather than just the scrolling (i have no idea right now, i'm at work so can't find out) and there are other ways that the speed of a game can vary rather than refresh speed, things like control response. Where is the difference between 25fps and doing 50fps with double steps? Well, there is none, if you need the same speed. And, yes, responsibility is the keyword. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazarus Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Where is the difference between 25fps and doing 50fps with double steps? Well, there is none, if you need the same speed. 50 fps is more responsive and looks better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irgendwer Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 (edited) ... BTW, what happened to your "super sophisticated percentage system" ? ROTFL When supplying the list, I already mentioned that I haven't got the time to update or maintain it. Still haven't got a clue what do you mean with 'percentage system'? In the (cumulative list) of titles I provided, you can find easily a game which has a higher rating than the entries you presented here: "For every title you can find, there is an other C64 title with a higher 'Lemon-rating' where the Atari version is even better." And if I would have problems finding high-rated titles to top yours, I would got for the Infocom adventures. I have the suspicion, that the performance of those (parser/disk) is better on A8 than on C64 - and there are some with a very high rating... But to be honest, this thread starts to bore me and my opinion ('head to head') from post #134 hasn't changed. Additionally it seems so, that we are through with uncovering the features of the machines. Edited October 16, 2009 by Irgendwer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
analmux Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Well, according to how I understand linguistic logic I'd say atariksi's words "If you had 256 colors, C64 pictures wouldn't be as ugly as they are." contain the word construction "as {adjective} as" , so it is a comparison. Then you made this remark: "so therefore "64 pictures are ugly". This isn't a comparison anymore. It's a statement. The key phrase is "C64 pictures wouldn't be as ugly as they are" - that's stating that all C64 pictures are ugly, not a specific image or a series but every single one of them. It isn't a comparison as such, more a generalisation. Well to me it just means: With 256 instead of 16 colours, C64 pictures would be less ugly, and it's still a comparison. It's like combining C64 colour density feature with A8 (GTIA) palette: The result would be better, or in other words, less ugly. This could again be translated: If C64 had 256 instead of 16 colours, pictures would be more beautiful. I guess I'd hear no one complaining then. Anyway, this is one way of interpreting what was said, and I think it's quite arrogant when others tell me how I should interpret atariksi's post, except when it really depends on a subtle aspect of English language (which isn't my first language anyway), but this construction exactly translates to a language construction I'm familiar with in my native tongue, and then it's still a relative statement, i.e. a comparision. Not an absolute one. Of course a statement like "With 256 instead of 16 colours, C64 pictures would be less ugly" still is something people can disagree on. Of course there are beautiful pictures just in 2 colours. And, of course something like 'ALL C64 pictures are ugly' is totally different matter, and is a wrong choice of words. Especially when just stating that without any frame of reference. But this frame WAS there. When Rockford uses the SAME words (see his last comparison) I didn't hear anyone complain (yet). When Rockford describes the graphics in Pro Mountain Bike as being ugly, that charge is aimed only at the one game and that isn't the same thing as tarring all A8 graphics with the ugly brush. Nobody complains about the generalisation there because he hasn't made one. Point 1: That makes no difference to me. Atariksi's statement and Rockford's staments are just about different subjects. The style type of the statements is the same. Point 2: That one post by Rockford is not the only one. Take a look at all Rockford's posts: Nearly all of them say that the atari gfx is ugly. In that case, the difference between the A8/C64 pics isn't that much, and we could say the C64 pics are LESS UGLY (than the A8 ones). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
analmux Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Where is the difference between 25fps and doing 50fps with double steps? Well, there is none, if you need the same speed. 50 fps is more responsive and looks better. Hmmm, I wonder. When Yoomp will be ported to C64, I'm rather sure the framerate will drop a tiny little bit, but there will be more colours on screen, so according to some C64 guys the game might look better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heaven/TQA Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 well... what do we compare now? 50fps screen refresh? 50 fps engine calculations? f.e. in a game like rescue on fractalus I could calculate internally everything in 50 fps but the gfx engine only puts every 2nd or 3rd pic on the screen... but when turning player realises that the game itselfs reacts on the smooth turns... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockford Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 ... BTW, what happened to your "super sophisticated percentage system" ? ROTFL When supplying the list, I already mentioned that I haven't got the time to update or maintain it. Still haven't got a clue what do you mean with 'percentage system'? In the (cumulative list) of titles I provided, you can find easily a game which has a higher rating than the entries you presented here: "For every title you can find, there is an other C64 title with a higher 'Lemon-rating' where the Atari version is even better." Okey then, I' ve posted 45 games so far (there will be more ) so, could you please find other 45 C64 titles with a higher 'Lemon-rating' where the Atari version is even better. Good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Where is the difference between 25fps and doing 50fps with double steps? Well, there is none, if you need the same speed. 50 fps is more responsive and looks better. 50 fps looks better if you have the possibility to use a better resolution. Ok, C64 has the possibility of using the double resolution there, but the handling is the main point there. Many C64 games look better, play faster, but the response is odd. The Last Ninja is the spot to look at, from a different view. The game uses hires sprites and hires movement. But the response is similar to a 100kHz CPU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irgendwer Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 BTW, try to count colours in these pictures, you know, just for kicks. These are from the game, right.. ? Oh boy... ROTFL Did you played the game? And watched a scene where you can also look 'along the floor' ? And inspected the colours of the moving objects (with a nice transition of colours BTW)? (Screenshot below shows 22 colours without 'enemy'!) Also, the border colour is different in the A8 version but reused for the sky on the C64. (Please, please try to verify your statements before posting. This is annoying!) BTW: The scene rendered on A8 seems to be bigger... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irgendwer Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 ... Wayout is simply faster due to the double scanline mode, and has nothing to do with some "superior" coding. The superior coding is done on the C64 for sure. Wrong. Wayout doesn't use the double scanline mode. But Paul used it to allow the two player simultaneous mode in 'Capture the Flag'... (from the same year like the C64 'Wayout') Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazyace Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 At this point i think someone is meant to point out that it's too early in the C64's lifespan for the programmers to have done a better job... look, can you take it as read that someone did and save us becoming repetitive like the "not golden age" thing? Ta. =-) Again wrong here. The Atari version is one year older. The coder has learned in that time to make some things better on the C64. It's similar to Rescue on Fractalus. One example is the compass. The coder used "better" colours for the directions. Not to tell about the "simple" Gr. 0 lines. Well, as we might see, to have more colours sometimes means, the "artist" has to take care about the correct ones. Having only "some" colours restricts the coder to use what that hardware has to offer. Sometimes it seems to be better to restrict other's thoughts Wayout is simply faster due to the double scanline mode, and has nothing to do with some "superior" coding. The superior coding is done on the C64 for sure. I don't think that Wayout uses a double scan line mode - it's just mirroring the 48line 64 pixel wide upper half of the display area. I guess the C64 version uses a grid of 6 chars by 16 chars for the upper half - arranged in vertical strips as that would optimised the line drawing ( I'd actually make it an imaginary 8x16 grid to ensure power of two offsets ) The reflection is then extra work to copy the top half into another 6x16 char block for the reflection ( 768 byte copy ). Most of the difference in speed should just be because the A8 has the faster CPU - ( the extra copy time doesn't help either ) - The Apple II version also seems a little bit slower as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockford Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 (edited) BTW, try to count colours in these pictures, you know, just for kicks. These are from the game, right.. ? Oh boy... ROTFL Did you played the game? And watched a scene where you can also look 'along the floor' ? And inspected the colours of the moving objects (with a nice transition of colours BTW)? (Screenshot below shows 22 colours without 'enemy'!) Also, the border colour is different in the A8 version but reused for the sky on the C64. (Please, please try to verify your statements before posting. This is annoying!) BTW: The scene rendered on A8 seems to be bigger... I haven't played it yet, but I'll give it a go. However, if we are talking about statements, what about yours ? "For every title you can find, there is an other C64 title with a higher 'Lemon-rating' where the Atari version is even better." I'd love to see them. Edited October 16, 2009 by Rockford Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 (edited) "C64 Games often get faster by using bigger steps for the movement" has nothing to do with gameplay at all. But the A8 version is apparently running at 25FPS, that can have a negative effect on a game where timing is important if the program is being hobbled back to that speed rather than just the scrolling (i have no idea right now, i'm at work so can't find out) and there are other ways that the speed of a game can vary rather than refresh speed, things like control response. Where is the difference between 25fps and doing 50fps with double steps? Well, there is none, if you need the same speed. It's fifty percent of the refresh speed, that's a huge difference. With 3D the refresh rate is a different matter because we're talking about multiple frames per update on any 8-bit but for 2D it makes a significant difference. And, yes, responsibility is the keyword. And if a game is checking the controls twenty five times a second, the game checking them at fifty times is twice as responsive. But that's just in theory, read back and i didn't specifically say it was happening. 50 fps looks better if you have the possibility to use a better resolution. No, 50FPS is always better than 25FPS. If faster framerates weren't better, you wouldn't have spent so much time banging on about how the C64 version of RoF was slower. Edited October 16, 2009 by TMR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarian63 Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 The Atari version has better graphics (more and better colours) and works smoothly . The C64 version has ugly graphics and works much slower . C64 lost again. At this point i think someone is meant to point out that it's too early in the C64's lifespan for the programmers to have done a better job... look, can you take it as read that someone did and save us becoming repetitive like the "not golden age" thing? Ta. =-) (By the way, "more and better colours"... y'probably should've found a screenshot that showed off a more colourful part of the game because the C64 screen appears to have one more colour than the A8 in the shots you've used...?) The thread is about games being better on the Atari, this one is! To say it does not qualify is the same as Rockfords post 85 examples. Can't have it both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irgendwer Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 ... Okey then, I' ve posted 45 games so far (there will be more ) so, could you please find other 45 C64 titles with a higher 'Lemon-rating' where the Atari version is even better. Good luck You can find them already in this thread. I noticed you are lazy, but please take a look to 'Allas' posts and mine. (It would be much easier if we had a list... ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashjazzcat Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 (edited) Don't take to heart fella, that there's TMR's special cheeky =-) at the end. I really don't think he was having a pop, merely having a little chuckle at what usually happens when someone dares agree with someone tarred with the C64 brush i was hoping the wording and smiley (well, those and the second part of the post about all of us ganging up and giving Jeremy Kyle a kicking... although that's actually not a bad idea now i read it back...?) spoke for themselves but yes flashjazzcat, i know you're aware and it was just meant as something of a joke. Probably a badly-judged one but i'm that on half a bag of wine gums and the new season of SJA starting... Yep - I just sat through an episode of Jeremy Kyle (with my wife) and it's a good idea. Mind you - most of his guests looked like they'd already had a good kicking... Anyway - sorry if I seemed to over-react. It just goes to show that there's no such thing as irony on the Internet! However, I'm prepared to blame the flu for being touchy. Edited October 16, 2009 by flashjazzcat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irgendwer Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 No, 50FPS is always better than 25FPS. If faster framerates weren't better, you wouldn't have spent so much time banging on about how the C64 version of RoF was slower. I'm just curious: How would a 50 FPS rate game would look like on a PAL system? Don't the systems put out a 25Hz full screen? There must be 'comb-artefacts' due to interlacing if they would update the screen with 50Hz? 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