Playing Sam's Journey, would an A8 version be possible

[carlsson]

I would be impressed by a game that is a cross between Yoomp! and the flight sequence in Master of the Lamps, i.e. a tunnel that takes turns to the left and right, goes up and down and you need to not fall through the holes. Whether or not that is doable on the Atari is beyond my knowledge.

[emkay]

I would be impressed by a game that is a cross between Yoomp! and the flight sequence in Master of the Lamps, i.e. a tunnel that takes turns to the left and right, goes up and down and you need to not fall through the holes. Whether or not that is doable on the Atari is beyond my knowledge.

The good point is that you have the possibility to chose the resolution for the needed fps.

You could make a pixel 1 scanline or 2 scanlines or 3 scanline or 240 scanlines high. Absolutely no special software needed for that.

[emkay]

For example:

If Yoomp! already hits the CPU limit, use ANTIC D followed by an ANTIC E line, adjusting LMS to have a dot 3 scanlines high. Doing that in the center of the screen/tube. It saves a lot data to handle, leaving more RAM available.

On the upper and lower edge, Details could be adjusted to get a more curved view....

Not additional calculations needed for the physics...

 

In an Ego view game, you could do some trickery by adding some ANTIC E lines and to cycle some pixel there. wile the rest of the wall is a single pixel... just doubled and mirrored from the upper to the lower screen....

You don't have the restriction , using graphics modes, and just to re use everything.

 

And, if the coder want to play a little more with it, he could just exchange the lines in the DL, for some additional z movement impression.

 

and so on....

[popmilo]

I would be impressed by a game that is a cross between Yoomp! and the flight sequence in Master of the Lamps, i.e. a tunnel that takes turns to the left and right, goes up and down and you need to not fall through the holes. Whether or not that is doable on the Atari is beyond my knowledge.

I like that idea too !

 

Now, dynamic like you wrote (yoomp+master of lamps) is not possible in same speed as yoomp without more ram. Yoomp relies on symmetry and huge unrolled batches of code (around 24K if I remember correctly). Without vertical symmetry that grows to 48k. And we would need 48k per each of different "shapes" of tunnel. So count how many you would need for simple transition from forward tunnel towards something like "tunnel going up-left"...

 

But... Something with simpler texture (repating pattern) can be done for sure imho. So it's a good idea.

[carlsson]

Heck, even a Yoomp II with the straight tunnel but where you can shoot baddies approaching would be good enough for me.

 

Here is the first production from One Man Group, a C64 demo from 2017 that got nothing but thumbs up on Pouët and rated 9.1 on CSDb.

 

While I don't know if it in any way defines state of its art (and the Atari probably could do it much nicer anyway), generally the people on CSDb don't upvote mediocre productions even if those are your first attempt.

[emkay]

Heck, even a Yoomp II with the straight tunnel but where you can shoot baddies approaching would be good enough for me.

 

Here is the first production from One Man Group, a C64 demo from 2017 that got nothing but thumbs up on Pouët and rated 9.1 on CSDb.

Tunnels like in that demos don't even need much CPU on the Atari. Could be interesting to ask the CPU, if it's bothered anyhow

But, as it seems, Software has to be there on the C64 to make it interesting for A8 coders.

Well, last year I started a thread named "Is the Atari uninspiring" , and the answer is "Almost" . In the last year only ONE effect has been in demos that has not been on the C64 first. You know, that 45 degree twister in Prozac Dream...

 

Or to write it the other way:

 

99% of the Atari community now tickles the last braincell how to do Sam's Journey on the Atari. While such a simple "Tunnel" isn't possible

Edited March 20, 2018 by emkay

[Heaven/TQA]

Tunnels like in that demos don't even need much CPU on the Atari. Could be interesting to ask the CPU, if it's bothered anyhow

But, as it seems, Software has to be there on the C64 to make it interesting for A8 coders.

Well, last year I started a thread named "Is the Atari uninspiring" , and the answer is "Almost" . In the last year only ONE effect has been in demos that has not been on the C64 first. You know, that 45 degree twister in Prozac Dream...

 

Or to write it the other way:

 

99% of the Atari community now tickles the last braincell how to do Sam's Journey on the Atari. While such a simple "Tunnel" isn't possible

 

 

are you reffering to the 50 fps square tunnel? or the dot tunnel?

 

you know how they are done? if so... explain the square one then... esp how you do it fast so the CPU is "idle".

[emkay]

are you reffering to the 50 fps square tunnel? or the dot tunnel?

 

you know how they are done? if so... explain the square one then... esp how you do it fast so the CPU is "idle".

Do I really have to explain, how charset rotation works?

Edited March 20, 2018 by emkay

[+MrFish]

You could make a convincing/playable Stun Runner type game using the dot tunnel. Use P/M's for ships and items. It'd look more sparse, but still convincing and quite cool. You could also take advantage of various color combinations for the depth effect on the Atari: instead of just gray-level pixels, you could also use any other color in a similar graded manner; some neat possibilities available with that.

Edited March 20, 2018 by MrFish

[Heaven/TQA]

Do I really have to explain, how charset rotation works?

 

 

yes. please let me know how you would do that in 50 FPS in Atari charmode. as it might be little bit more trickery in there. as never did such a tunnel would be interesting to do on a8.

 

re: stun runner

 

Edited March 20, 2018 by Heaven/TQA

[emkay]

yes. please let me know how you would do that in 50 FPS in Atari charmode...

Heaven

 

You know how slow Atari Basic is. And you know how the games did the animations.

 

The main screen is just rotating the graphics. Parts of it change the characters , to have some additional movement. This in the right co-relation makes the whole effect done. Possible 3 or four characters need to change the content, to give some additional effect, hiding the simplicity of the whole ...

Edited March 20, 2018 by emkay

[+MrFish]

e: stun runner

 

[YouTube Stun Runner Video]

 

Oooooh... that doesn't look good at all. First time I'd seen that game on the C64.

[emkay]

re: stun runner

 

Ruckel zuckel

[VladR]

I would be impressed by a game that is a cross between Yoomp! and the flight sequence in Master of the Lamps, i.e. a tunnel that takes turns to the left and right, goes up and down and you need to not fall through the holes. Whether or not that is doable on the Atari is beyond my knowledge.

This is basically the premise of my flatshading thread in the programming section

 

I'm talking fully-polygonal, no tricks, a simple 3D camera, no char-mode, just good old 160x96 with 4 colors.

 

The build I had last September would need about 125,000 cycles, but my recent optimizations brought this down to about 97,000 which is around 15 fps.

 

So, totally doable. You could spend another frame on rendering enemies, and still get around 12 fps.

[carlsson]

S.T.U.N. Runner reminds me a little of the arcade game Hydra (1990) by Atari Games/Tengen with home ports by Domark. While it was released for the Amstrad CPC, ZX Spectrum, C64, Amiga, Atari ST and Lynx, it was too late for a port to the Atari 8-bits.

[VladR]

You could make a convincing/playable Stun Runner type game using the dot tunnel. Use P/M's for ships and items. It'd look more sparse, but still convincing and quite cool. You could also take advantage of various color combinations for the depth effect on the Atari: instead of just gray-level pixels, you could also use any other color in a similar graded manner; some neat possibilities available with that.

We don't even have to downgrade visuals to dots. Wireframe is plenty good, as StuntCarRacing showed. Of course, once you cross the horizon, you need the scanline fill, but for majority of gameplay, it's just wireframe.

 

This is actually something I've ben benchmarking recently on my 6502 flatshader, so I'm reasonably sure that the environment would run at about 15 fps. But, you'd get proper hills, valleys, curves, you could place generic objects at the side of the road.

[Heaven/TQA]

Heaven

 

You know how slow Atari Basic is. And you know how the games did the animations.

 

The main screen is just rotating the graphics. Parts of it change the characters , to have some additional movement. This in the right co-relation makes the whole effect done. Possible 3 or four characters need to change the content, to give some additional effect, hiding the simplicity of the whole ...

 

 

look more closer to the video as coders say... it is not that simple as it might look at first glance... its not simple charset flips.

Edited March 20, 2018 by Heaven/TQA

[+MrFish]

We don't even have to downgrade visuals to dots. Wireframe is plenty good, as StuntCarRacing showed. Of course, once you cross the horizon, you need the scanline fill, but for majority of gameplay, it's just wireframe.

 

This is actually something I've ben benchmarking recently on my 6502 flatshader, so I'm reasonably sure that the environment would run at about 15 fps. But, you'd get proper hills, valleys, curves, you could place generic objects at the side of the road.

 

I know wireframe is possible, but the added framerate from using dots would be welcome; plus, it just has a particularly cool look.

 

I think even wireframe looks great without filling. To me, that was one thing that was cool about early 3D -- in a similar way that limited colors and resolution on these old machines looks. You get a unique, abstract look to things, rather than being too close to what something more realistic looks like. And frankly, that's one of the reasons I have an interest in these machines in the first place. Even back in the day, that's what I liked about them. There were much better graphics that could be seen on some really high-end workstations, but it didn't interest me that much. I liked something that looked more "computerized". And I still do.

Edited March 20, 2018 by MrFish

[emkay]

look more closer to the video as coders say... it is not that simple as it might look at first glance...

If you want to look behind it.

Why don't you just check it ?

 

Start with a 4 character set rotation. Then replace some characters to show the lines moving "not" like the charset rotation.

For the start, you'd need 4 different types of shift for the line(s) right left right upper lower line plus the 4 corners. Let them rotate .... save some chars for the faster line movement.

As the "character mode" on the C64 is linear, you can do fast changing of the screen content. The effect mainly is done by the interleaving of a filled char and an empty char. changing the content "the other frame" results in a movement and saves CPU time for other changes. As the use of details is missing, it should also be no problem to have the moving cluster in the same size.

But, for the Atari it could be much more interesting to show this effect in a circle, not just in a square.

Edited March 20, 2018 by emkay

[Heaven/TQA]

What if I tell you that nope its not working like that?

[emkay]

What if I tell you that nope its not working like that?

This simple effect could be reached with several solutions. The have all in common that a lot of the graphics has to be re used.

[Heaven/TQA]

As I said... its not that simple.... multilayer z sorted free movable square tunnel.

 

Please do it in basic. We can run it in fast mode doesnt matter.

[emkay]

As I said... its not that simple.... multilayer z sorted free movable square tunnel.

Yeah, seems that is what they think they do.

[emkay]

It's actually THE feature that C64 coders can do best. Show more than actually has been done. Similar with the star-tunnel. In a filled polygon solution, you wouldn't see the "depth" that is shown by the lesser pixels and what the eye gets presented.

Edited March 20, 2018 by emkay

[VladR]

 

I know wireframe is possible, but the added framerate from using dots would be welcome; plus, it just has particularly cool look.

 

I think even wireframe looks great without filling. To me, that was one thing that was cool about early 3D -- in a similar way that limited colors and resolution on these old machines looks. You get a unique, abstract look to things, rather than being too close to what something more realistic looks like. And frankly, that's one of the reasons I have an interest in these machines in the first place. Even back in the day, that's what I liked about them. There were much better graphics that could be seen on some really high-end workstations, but it didn't interest me that much. I liked something that looked more "computerized". And I still do.

I totally agree with the cool look of the dot wireframe, especially when they move fast, it looks real special.

 

Here's a quick hack for the StunRunner data set. I didn't enable the top sides, so you'll have to excuse me for that, as I'm in the middle of reimplementing the 3D transform stage and didn't want to mess with it too much:

 

ClearScreen+Rasterize+Clipping takes 38,003 cycles.

My old transform code took 179c/vertex, so with 20 vertices, it's 20*179 = 3,580c, e.g. 41,583c

 

There's one remaining stage to implement in asm, and that's the fixed-point coefficient table look up, but it should still be under 48,000c - e.g. 30 fps, as you have 24,186c per frame available.

 

Adding the top polygons on left/right will cross over to 20 fps, but that's ok for Atari, I am pretty sure.