Wich one of these two Prince of Persia you prefer?

[emkay]

 

Emkay why not admit that I finally get things without troubles.

 

You things that work!...

 

Now I get things that work.

 

 

Wasn't you that want just soft sprite underlay (just soft sprite masking) and no double the work (and not soft and hardware sprites Masking)?

 

 

Now you have it.

 

I'll wait to see if anyone is coding this and want me to help in geting PoP in a good IMHO and fast playable game.

 

 

 

 

 

EMKAY: You never admit. Even when people are doing the same as you defend or most of it.

 

You still saying that it doesn't work.

 

What I have now isn't the same as you were thinking to turn things simple to get the game coded?

 

(but the other way is/was still possible but 'coding more painful')

 

 

 

You will never change, don't you?

 

 

 

 

Simple as that: Show me one game that comes close to your concept . Show me if it's fluent... Show me a proof of concept.... at least from G2F.

 

Checkout what it takes from the CPU.

 

 

Then we may talk further

 

[José Pereira]

name='emkay' timestamp='1318624728' post='2389182']

Emkay why not admit that I finally get things without troubles.

 

You things that work!...

 

Now I get things that work.

 

 

Wasn't you that want just soft sprite underlay (just soft sprite masking) and no double the work (and not soft and hardware sprites Masking)?

 

 

Now you have it.

 

I'll wait to see if anyone is coding this and want me to help in geting PoP in a good IMHO and fast playable game.

 

 

 

 

 

EMKAY: You never admit. Even when people are doing the same as you defend or most of it.

 

You still saying that it doesn't work.

 

What I have now isn't the same as you were thinking to turn things simple to get the game coded?

 

(but the other way is/was still possible but 'coding more painful')

 

 

 

You will never change, don't you?

 

 

 

 

Simple as that: Show me one game that comes close to your concept . Show me if it's fluent... Show me a proof of concept.... at least from G2F.

 

Checkout what it takes from the CPU.

 

 

Then we may talk further

 

 

I will not continue to waste my time with you...

 

 

YOU HAVE HERE IS 4COLOURS BITMAP GR.15.

YOU SIMPLE HAVE THE PILLARS AS SOFT SPRITE THAT WILL MASK THE GUYS.

I CAN GET ALL EXACTLY FROM C64 (JUST CHANGE SOME PILLAR'S PIXELS).

 

THEN YOU HAVE A SIMPLE A8 PMs. ROUTINE THAT MOVE ON SCREEN BUT BECAUSE THEY ARE IN PRIOR4 THEY WILL GO BEHIND THE PILLARS.

IT'S EXACTLY LIKE EVERYTHING DONE IN C16, CPC, ZX OR ANY OTHER COMPUTER WITH SOFT SPRITES ONLY BUT ADD PMs. BECAUSE A8 HAVE THEM.

 

GAMES ON A8 WITH SOFT SPRITES AND PMs. MOVING ARE ALMOST ALL THAT EXIST WHERE THERE ARE MANY SPRITES MOVING (BECAUSE A8 DON'T ENOUGH Nº OF HARDWARE SPRITES)

WHERE IS THE TROUBLE HERE?

 

 

 

Here is the screen and the guys in PRIOR4:

I really hope that if really exists someone coding this to A8 give me a call.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyone can say something because I am starting to be ... with Emkay!

Thanks.

Edited October 14, 2011 by José Pereira

[Creature XL]

Come on guys. Continue.

I am laughing my ass off.

Stop discussing the easy things. There is no problem with masking this and that. A PAL A8 has plenty of power for this.

 

It's a static screen with up to 4 big soft sprite, which runs 25 fps tops, even on the C64.

 

I bet in the meantime while you are discussing, at least three guys have implemented a test engine

 

As Irgendwer said: priceless

 

 

Ps: take it with I had Done beers

 

 

Edit: I think the bigger problems would be the RAM organization

Edited October 14, 2011 by Creature XL

[José Pereira]

If someone gets in touch with Mrsid I think he's doing the right decision.

When I saw the C64 version for the first time I also send him a PM to see if I get his (their) authorization.

I also had the real sprites shapes of the C64 version for some time (thanks to STE86 to build them) that I am converting to fit in the the A8 PM's width. and there are only a dozen, more or less, of small pixels amendments.

I always see that the C64 version was the best to get: The Gfxs.. are great and the work is already done (and more, as many things can be ported (almost) directly.

I've got all screens/levels with good IMHO colours/luminances, I spend the last Nights into this.

I started the first PoP Thread many, many Months ago when the PoP film came into the cinemas.

I had developed a way to simple move and mask soft sprites (where PMs. are hardware masked because of beeing in PRIOR4)

 

The possible/interested coder contacts Mrsid and I agree he did that (I also did this and also did this on other games like Sub-Hunter that C64 coder Frank gasking send me all the production stuff or in Uwol that I developed many gfxs. from scratch and some from C64 but I also ask permission to those Spanish guys Team called 'The Mojon twins'), but I can't believe that I didn't receive a PM.

I think that for what I did on PoP and all my time waste in A8 I, at least deserve a call.

I could get a real good looking game that coder sure turn into reality.

 

I am feeling sad now...

I have games with coders that aren't with time to continue the code...

Here I have one game that I start the 'pressure' and 'ideas/way of...' the same way like dozens of others I post here.

But someone has an interest in coding it.

Finally I would get a game 'I dream to build into A8' and then the coder don't bother to give me a call.

I am really sad and don't know if it is worth to continue with my A8 efforts.

 

Probably the better was I think in Money and was doing this things just to have a game at ABBUC contest like some guys to win the Prize Money or like someone that sends me a P.M. trying to get from 600€->1200€ to code Last Ninja.

He was using my 'crazy about LN' to get Money and win some Prizes, sells some carts,...

 

It's this type of things that really makes me wonder why I am constantly spend time... Probably, what I am doing is, in reality, wasting time.

 

José Pereira.

 

 

 

 

For the Proof that I can be right, please saw this youTube video that is very well recorded and clearly see the guy's moving/climbing/falling/masking/...:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuvuPVtpyhM&feature=related

Edited October 14, 2011 by José Pereira

[emkay]

Come on guys. Continue.

I am laughing my ass off.

Stop discussing the easy things. There is no problem with masking this and that. A PAL A8 has plenty of power for this.

 

It's a static screen with up to 4 big soft sprite, which runs 25 fps tops, even on the C64.

 

I bet in the meantime while you are discussing, at least three guys have implemented a test engine

 

As Irgendwer said: priceless

 

 

What people name "Test engine" is even priceless.

 

 

Ps: take it with I had Done beers

 

 

Edit: I think the bigger problems would be the RAM organization

 

The biggest problem is to have the game running. When not predict all features on the A8, things get an end rather before they're finished.

As Mr. SID wrote: In the middle of the development you may change the graphicsmode. And he is writing it, using a C64, where such game is done rather easy, compared to the A8.

The Protagonist is freely walking/Jumping "everywhere". There are independend background animations (not doable with charmode animations). And the most important point: It has to look and play like Prince of Persia.

 

If you decide to do a PAL version only, I'm in.

 

We have a faster CPU, but there is the double of work to do.

[emkay]

Let's have a look at "test engines"....

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kthZdlr6wL0

 

 

Slow as hell.... just one freely walking object, 3 additional objects over a 32 bytes screen. Remember, the Atari scolling comes almost for free.

To say "PoP" only has a static screen, is similar to the free usable colours on the C64. It doesn't really matter.

 

In PoP you easily have more than "4 moving objects", because background animations are "moving objects" aswell.

Background masking is not really used in A8 games.

 

And this one is using the fast gr. 7 mode:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2HCX5x31zw

 

.... and there is no foreground masking used....

 

 

[emkay]

PoP on the Spectrum. Possibly a good source for a port.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_qnLmfxhS0

 

 

....possibly....

 

 

Well, we have Amaurote, but it is using only a 32 byte mode and no overlay. The objects are rather small, but it has slowdowns, where the Speccy version keeps the fluent animations.

 

 

[José Pereira]

Come on guys. Continue.

I am laughing my ass off.

Stop discussing the easy things. There is no problem with masking this and that. A PAL A8 has plenty of power for this.

 

It's a static screen with up to 4 big soft sprite, which runs 25 fps tops, even on the C64.

 

I bet in the meantime while you are discussing, at least three guys have implemented a test engine

 

As Irgendwer said: priceless

 

 

What people name "Test engine" is even priceless.

 

 

Ps: take it with I had Done beers

 

 

Edit: I think the bigger problems would be the RAM organization

 

The biggest problem is to have the game running. When not predict all features on the A8, things get an end rather before they're finished.

As Mr. SID wrote: In the middle of the development you may change the graphicsmode. And he is writing it, using a C64, where such game is done rather easy, compared to the A8.

The Protagonist is freely walking/Jumping "everywhere". There are independend background animations (not doable with charmode animations). And the most important point: It has to look and play like Prince of Persia.

 

If you decide to do a PAL version only, I'm in.

 

We have a faster CPU, but there is the double of work to do.

 

 

 

You wake-up Emkay re-starting all over again.

Bad Morning to you as I think it seems it is starting to be.

 

 

Sheet to you Emkay.

The screen I have it's 4COLOURS

 

THERE IS A SIMPLE SOFT SPRITE RUNNING THAT ARE SOFT SPRITES AND PILLARS ARE SOFT SPRITES THAT INTERACT/MASK WITH THE GUYS WHEN THEY ARE BEHIND THEM.

 

 

A8 HAVE 4PMs. AND YOU ARE JUST MOVING THEM ON SCREEN.

THRE'S NO NEED TO MASK THE PLAYERS BECAUSE THEY ARE ALWAYS BEHIND THE FOREGROUND PILLARS BECAUSE WE ARE USING GPRIOR4.

 

 

THERE ARE DOZENS OF GAMES WITH SOFT SPRITES MOVING AND THE 4PMS...

IT IS SAME AS A STATIC SCREEN OF THOSE OLD POLLAND LIKE GAMES WHERE YOU HAVE THE ENEMYS SOFT SPRITES AND OUR GUY AS HARDWARE PMS.

HERE THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE PMS. AND THE SOFT SPRITES ARE ONE ABOVE THE OTHER (AT THE SAME xPOS.)

 

 

THE GAME HAVE OTHER TROUBLES BUT IN RAM,... LIKE CREATUREXL IS SAYING.

FOR GFXS. AND THE PILLARS LIKE THAT IT IS A SIMPLE GAME IF THERE WASN'T LOTS OF SCREENS, LOTS OF SPRITE FRAMES,...

 

 

AND WHAT THE HELL THOSE VIDEOS HAVE TO DO WITH PRINCE?

THEY ARE SCROLLING...

 

 

 

I AM JUST DOING THE SAME AS YOU, JUST 4COLOURS BUT BECAUSE MY GFXS. ARE FROM C64 YOU SIMPLY DON'T ADMIT THAT WE HAVE NOW THE SAME IDEAS.

YOUR POINT IS THAT THIS IS FROM C64 AND USING C64 THINGS (LIKE STE86 SPRITES )

USING THIS OR THE SHIT OF YOUR SCREENS IS THE SAME...

IT''S THE SAME GR.15 BITMAP MODE, SAME PMS. UNDERLAYS IN PRIOR4 BUT YOU THINK ALL THAT CAMES FROM C64 OR C64 GUYS IS BAD.

IF IT IS FROM APPLE OR ANY OTHER IT CAN BE USED.

MRSID STUDY AND CODE C64 BASED ON ORIGINAL MECHNER'S APPLE2 CODING... IF WE ARE USING A C64 BASIS WE ARE USING THE APPLE2 BASIS ALSO.

AN A8 CODER CAN GO AND SEE THE APPLE2 CODE TO IMPLEMENT IT ON A8 BUT USE THE C64 GFXS. TILES AND SPRITES.

BUT NO, FOR MR. EMKAY THE SAME OBJECT, THE SAME TILE IN AN UGGLY 2COLOURS GFX. OF THE APPLE2 IS BETTER THAN THE SAME OBJECT TILE IN REAL 2:1 3COLOURS OF THE C64. FOR CODING IT'S THE SAME (A8 HAVE FOUR PLAYFIELD COLOUR REGISTERS TO USE IN BITMAP GR.15 MODE, IF YOU PUT ONE, TWO, THREE OR FOUR COLOURS ON A TILE IS JUST A QUESTION OF THE GFXS LIKES FOR THE CODER IT IS THE SAME)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ALBERT PLEASE LOCK THIS THREAD...

I AM STARTING TO BE ... WITH EMKAY AND I MAY SAY SOMETHING BAD... REALLY BAD...

 

OR I MUST I REALLY HAVE TO PUT HERE SOMETHING REALLY BAD FOR YOU LOCK THIS THREAD AND I'LL GET THE CONSEQUENCES OF MY ACT AND BE BANNED FROM HERE!...

Edited October 15, 2011 by José Pereira

[Rybags]

Spectrum port = puke.

 

And Jose, can you leave the CAPS out of the forum. All it serves is to annoy people and make you look like a raving kid.

[José Pereira]

Spectrum port = puke.

 

And Jose, can you leave the CAPS out of the forum. All it serves is to annoy people and make you look like a raving kid.

 

Probably, that CAPS part are just dedicated to Emkay not for you guys.

 

 

Edit: Emkay without CAPS is also annoying me!...

Edited October 15, 2011 by José Pereira

[emkay]

Sheet to you Emkay.

The screen I have it's 4COLOURS

 

THERE IS A SIMPLE SOFT SPRITE RUNNING THAT ARE SOFT SPRITES AND PILLARS ARE SOFT SPRITES THAT INTERACT/MASK WITH THE GUYS WHEN THEY ARE BEHIND THEM.

 

 

A8 HAVE 4PMs. AND YOU ARE JUST MOVING THEM ON SCREEN.

THRE'S NO NEED TO MASK THE PLAYERS BECAUSE THEY ARE ALWAYS BEHIND THE FOREGROUND PILLARS BECAUSE WE ARE USING GPRIOR4.

 

 

OK. If so, you have to take care of the background graphics(mask them), because the Players get behind them aswell. Same with the floor.

 

 

 

THERE ARE DOZENS OF GAMES WITH SOFT SPRITES MOVING AND THE 4PMS...

IT IS SAME AS A STATIC SCREEN OF THOSE OLD POLLAND LIKE GAMES WHERE YOU HAVE THE ENEMYS SOFT SPRITES AND OUR GUY AS HARDWARE PMS.

HERE THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE PMS. AND THE SOFT SPRITES ARE ONE ABOVE THE OTHER (AT THE SAME xPOS.)

 

 

Which means the double work for the CPU...

 

 

THE GAME HAVE OTHER TROUBLES BUT IN RAM,... LIKE CREATUREXL IS SAYING.

FOR GFXS. AND THE PILLARS LIKE THAT IT IS A SIMPLE GAME IF THERE WASN'T LOTS OF SCREENS, LOTS OF SPRITE FRAMES,...

 

 

Well, well.... I have seen very much projects been cancelled at a lower starting approach

 

 

 

AND WHAT THE HELL THOSE VIDEOS HAVE TO DO WITH PRINCE?

THEY ARE SCROLLING...

 

 

Scrolling is less than an object build on software. Scrolling is one of the easiest features of the A8. Same with Player shaping. It can cost 0 cycles and horizontal movement only cost 6 cycles (from the command side)...

 

 

 

I AM JUST DOING THE SAME AS YOU, JUST 4COLOURS BUT BECAUSE MY GFXS. ARE FROM C64 YOU SIMPLY DON'T ADMIT THAT WE HAVE NOW THE SAME IDEAS.

 

 

My idea is to use the PM graphics with the least cost of CPU cycles.

YOUR POINT IS THAT THIS IS FROM C64 AND USING C64 THINGS (LIKE STE86 SPRITES )

USING THIS OR THE SHIT OF YOUR SCREENS IS THE SAME...

IT''S THE SAME GR.15 BITMAP MODE, SAME PMS. UNDERLAYS IN PRIOR4 BUT YOU THINK ALL THAT CAMES FROM C64 OR C64 GUYS IS BAD.

IF IT IS FROM APPLE OR ANY OTHER IT CAN BE USED.

 

MRSID STUDY AND CODE C64 BASED ON ORIGINAL MECHNER'S APPLE2 CODING... IF WE ARE USING A C64 BASIS WE ARE USING THE APPLE2 BASIS ALSO.

AN A8 CODER CAN GO AND SEE THE APPLE2 CODE TO IMPLEMENT IT ON A8 BUT USE THE C64 GFXS. TILES AND SPRITES.

BUT NO, FOR MR. EMKAY THE SAME OBJECT, THE SAME TILE IN AN UGGLY 2COLOURS GFX. OF THE APPLE2 IS BETTER THAN THE SAME OBJECT TILE IN REAL 2:1 3COLOURS OF THE C64. FOR CODING IT'S THE SAME (A8 HAVE FOUR PLAYFIELD COLOUR REGISTERS TO USE IN BITMAP GR.15 MODE, IF YOU PUT ONE, TWO, THREE OR FOUR COLOURS ON A TILE IS JUST A QUESTION OF THE GFXS. LIKES. FOR THE CODER IT IS THE SAME)

 

 

 

...

Edited October 15, 2011 by emkay

[emkay]

Spectrum port = puke.

 

 

Right. But it works.

[José Pereira]

What PM gfxs. with the less cost of CPU?

You have two guys moving and have to colour them,

You have Rocks that are PFs.

 

Emkay you just simply are ignoring what I write...

Of course the PMs. goes over gfxs. because they are above the soft sprite Backgr. colour register.

But they will be Masked by the Pillars because the soft sprite in itself (Backgr-Black and PF2-White in the guys) is Masked/replaced by the Pillar.

 

Sheet!...

Edited October 15, 2011 by José Pereira

[emkay]

What PM gfxs. with the less cost of CPU.

You have two guys moving and have to colour them,

You have Rocks that are PFs.

 

Emkay you just simply are ignoring what I write...

 

Because there is no common sense. Either you have pm over or under the PF.

Either you use 8 moving objects, or 4 objects based on software sprites with full PM overlay.

 

Just show me a demonstration, how your solution works at movement and handling the background and foreground correctly.

 

 

Of course the PMs. goes over gfxs. because they are above the soft sprite Backgr. register.

But they will be Masked by the Pillars because the soft sprite in itself (Backgr-Black and PF2-White) is Masked/replaced by the Pillar.

 

PM over the GFX is priority 1 not 4. Which means a softsprite cannot mask the PMg.

The only solution would be to build the pillar fully on Players.

Edited October 15, 2011 by emkay

[José Pereira]

PM over the GFX is priority 1 not 4. Which means a softsprite cannot mask the PMg.

The only solution would be to build the pillar fully on Players.

 

 

PMs over or under Gfxs on a moving guy is the same.

PFs. have four colour registers: PF0, PF1,PF2&Background.

Soft sprite is with a PM then:

-> If PRIOR1 all the PMs pixels are above all PF's bit-pairs

-> If PRIOR4 then all the PMs will only be seen when you have (00) Background register on the soft sprites shape.

And it's exactly what I have here. My soft sprite only has PF2(White) and (00) in the PMs visible area.

 

Now when you Mask the soft sprites with the Pillars the PMs are simply and automatic MASKED.

Are you reding MASKED!

 

 

The soft sprites have PF0, or have three bit-pairs or or have the four bit-pairs in them is the same.

As the same is having one, two, three bit-pairs in Gfxs.

 

 

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now I see why you are like you are.

 

You don't do anything but, you are also undermining these discussions, forcing silly guys as I spend time with you

.

This time could be well used to do other things much more interesting.

 

The problem is that guys like me that just can't resist to answer all these stupidities estão''fodidos' (translate to if you want ...).

You really should have learn some way to get people mad.

For a guy like you that is always puting down C64 things or against their fans in reality is you that are doing them a big favour.

 

 

Shit ...

Edited October 15, 2011 by José Pereira

[emkay]

Using 3 colours per object solves many problems. The hardware gives the solution "background/foreground" for free.

Playershapes cost neither CPU nor RAM.

 

And now some program code

 

do:

If CPU and RAM allows after the game is fully working, add graphical features (finetuning)

loop:

 

 

[emkay]

 

Now when you Mask the soft sprites with the Pillars the PMs are simply and automatic MASKED.

Are you reding MASKED!

 

 

So you mean full softwareprite handling and full PM handling, because you have to take care of the background and the floor. This means you use 2 moving objects to suite one.

 

Just show me a working example....

[Rybags]

PM masking would work "to a point" by the masking for the softsprite vs pillars if PMG Priority = under all PF.

 

The problem is the gaps in the bricks. If background colour was reassigned to something else, ie nothing to do with "in front pillars" then problem solved.

 

It might be worthy of consideration, a non-black border isn't a major issue.

 

Animation of flame etc. is a non issue. Something ~ 8 FPS would be fine, multiple objects can have the workload interleaved.

[emkay]

You don't do anything but, you are also undermining these discussions, forcing silly guys as I spend time with you

.

This time could be well used to do other things much more interesting.

 

 

Sorry José. You start those threads, not me. I'm just explaining things...

 

 

The problem is that guys like me that just can't resist to answer all these stupidities estão''fodidos' (translate to if you want ...).

You really should have learn some way to get people mad.

For a guy like you that is always puting down C64 things or against their fans in reality is you that are doing them a big favour.

 

Ouch.... I'm not putting down C64 things. It's just that C64 can do things, the A8 cannot do. Accept that and see the possible. That's all.

 

 

 

[José Pereira]

Bitmap masking is Bitmap Masking whatever bi-pair you have on the gfxs, on the soft sprites,...

You use one or even all according to the colours you need to have on them.

 

Where's the difference?

 

I have three colours on the Pillars (PF0,PF1&PF2) but I only want to have two colours in the guys shapes(PF2&Backgr.) because I need to have the PMs seen on the guys.

 

Background register on a soft sprite is the same as the other bit-pairs.

You can say that on a soft sprite there's a 5th colour that is the same (00)bit-pair but this same bit-pair is the transparent one:

This byte, for example:

00,01,10,00

The left can be seen with PM above it but the right one not.

It just a simply thing you do when you AND the soft sprite inverse with the Gfxs. asm.

 

SOFT SPRITE: 00,01,10,00 (this right one is the transparent)

Over a gfx it it will show 00,01,10,(here will be the gfx's bit-pair)

 

Gfxs:11,11,11,11

AND

SSpr00,00,00,11 (Masked soft sprite)

---------------------

Get: 00,00,00,11

OR

Sspr00,01,10,11(real soft sprite shape)

---------------------

Get: 00,01,10,11

 

Now you see that left part of the soft sprites has (00) and it will show PM pixel and the rightest bit-pair has the (11) that is the gfx's pixel.

Where's the problem

 

If I was using PRIOR1 then I could have the PMs pixels over all the gfxs.pixels but I could have other possible solutions if other GPRIORS used.

Edited October 15, 2011 by José Pereira

[José Pereira]

You don't do anything but, you are also undermining these discussions, forcing silly guys as I spend time with you

.

This time could be well used to do other things much more interesting.

 

 

Sorry José. You start those threads, not me. I'm just explaining things...

 

 

The problem is that guys like me that just can't resist to answer all these stupidities estão''fodidos' (translate to if you want ...).

You really should have learn some way to get people mad.

For a guy like you that is always puting down C64 things or against their fans in reality is you that are doing them a big favour.

 

Ouch.... I'm not putting down C64 things. It's just that C64 can do things, the A8 cannot do. Accept that and see the possible. That's all.

 

 

EDIT: You are not explaining things because you are not saying nothing.

You are not even sayinmg wrong things because you really aren't saying nothing...

 

Now I know what others feel and why there are soo many answers and why some times there are some type of comments to your posts.

You simply can get others . You really are a talent guy to do that.

 

 

 

 

I start this Threads because I know what I am saying.

I have games that are with coders that work. they aren't final but they are 'in the making'.

 

 

I start these Threads like many others start but the problem is that you always enter to 'foder' others ideas and that you are the only illuminate on A8.

It seems you like to put others work down.

Edited October 15, 2011 by José Pereira

[José Pereira]

PM masking would work "to a point" by the masking for the softsprite vs pillars if PMG Priority = under all PF.

 

The problem is the gaps in the bricks. If background colour was reassigned to something else, ie nothing to do with "in front pillars" then problem solved.

 

It might be worthy of consideration, a non-black border isn't a major issue.

 

Animation of flame etc. is a non issue. Something ~ 8 FPS would be fine, multiple objects can have the workload interleaved.

 

 

Rybags there's no gaps in the Pillars and the game is based on that... That's what I am saying to Emkay.

I don't see the point if the soft sprite has this or that bit-pair...

 

There are other situation when you climb or fall a Wall but here it could be the PM having different shapes.

[Rybags]

There are gaps (mortar = COLBAK) in the pillars.

 

Redoing the pillars with another colour in place of the black where the rest of the bricks have that black mortar would look cheap.

 

And there's another thing that's barely been considered - most speculation of how to do things has revolved around Level 1.

There's other levels with completely different colour schemes and detail layout that could throw a spanner in the works.

[emkay]

There are gaps (mortar = COLBAK) in the pillars.

 

Redoing the pillars with another colour in place of the black where the rest of the bricks have that black mortar would look cheap.

 

And there's another thing that's barely been considered - most speculation of how to do things has revolved around Level 1.

There's other levels with completely different colour schemes and detail layout that could throw a spanner in the works.

 

That's why general 4 colour gfx won't work. And that's why the solution of using PM shapes only, will help much.

3 colour per object, with the possibility of using up to 9 colors per scanline really isn't a bad choice.

Actually, it hasn't been done before.... particular with all background/foreground handling.

[José Pereira]

There are gaps (mortar = COLBAK) in the pillars.

 

Redoing the pillars with another colour in place of the black where the rest of the bricks have that black mortar would look cheap.

 

And there's another thing that's barely been considered - most speculation of how to do things has revolved around Level 1.

There's other levels with completely different colour schemes and detail layout that could throw a spanner in the works.

Rybags I first see and think in all and then I post.

I know what I am posting.

I accept others opinions if they are constructive ones...

 

 

Don't worry because the other Levels gfxs. doesn't even have the Black colour on them.

And yes, the Pillars can have only three colours and Rock colours have 4colours.

 

And I don't think this way would look bad.

(those gaps with Black on the sides is a real gap in the Pillar Rocks and it's 'natural' that the PMs pixels would be seen there)

 

In my opinion it is better have this than an uggly 3colours only (without Black) Walls...

But even if you don't like (or the coder ) I have other possible Pillar Rock solution (lets say it's something like stonehenge Monument )

Edited October 15, 2011 by José Pereira