emkay Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 i think it's generating blocks of font and screens to display them on the fly and optimising as much as it can, either way it's pretty impressive to watch it working. Didn't I write the same? Ok you seem to put the words into correct english >That's what i mean about demo code, the trick is in making it look like you're doing more than you actually are; in this case, it's doing quite a bit anyway 'cos it all crunches down to 4K... My words too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZylonBane Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 Belonging to the XL/XE graphics, there is really nothing that I am satisfied with... Well then, you're always welcome to sod off, you know. In fact, if you're not ever going to accept that the C64 simply has a more modern (if less elegant) video chip than the A8 line, and continue whining that Atari graphics, sounds, and coders suck, then maybe that would be for the best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heaven/TQA Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 @ TMR i'll soon get to my real atari... i have setup everything but my sio2pc interface uses a "large" connector for serial port which no pc/laptop has anymore so i'll get tomorrow an adaptor... hope to find some in the city... but the good thing is... i'll fired up my new tv set... it still found my atari signal... which is a good feeling... i turned on my atari 130xe and the familiar sound of booting up came out of the tv...and finally the familiar "READY" appeared on the blue screen... a final "BYE" and entering the audio test prooved me that the machine is running fine... did i ever forget the small melody... i guess not... question: which PC software is the best to use the PC as server for the atari? APE? heaven ps. sorry TMR for being so lame... i really havent thought it takes so long setting up the damned old hardware... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 Belonging to the XL/XE graphics, there is really nothing that I am satisfied with... Well then, you're always welcome to sod off, you know. In fact, if you're not ever going to accept that the C64 simply has a more modern (if less elegant) video chip than the A8 line, and continue whining that Atari graphics, sounds, and coders suck, then maybe that would be for the best. In fact it was better for the XL/XEs that people like TMR were there in the past and today and some who still thought what a ZylonBane is thinking had "SOD OFF" already ... so we had today Games and Demos to show the real abilites of that smart machines. As old as my MCS pictures are... people like you never would have created them. Contrary they made my work a lot more difficult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 sorry TMR for being so lame... i really havent thought it takes so long setting up the damned old hardware... Don't worry, no deadlines or anything for either production... =-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 To make it clear. This time I am searching to get an Answer why there are so much people so experienced in coding on the C64 and why not on the XL/XE. Unfortunatly the C64 coders made a mistake to use interlace... With interlace you can use 128(16000 resulting) colors in 320x192(200) and Displaylist-Interlace saves CPU-time too. So it belongs only to the "be done". But how will it ever be done if no one knows it and everyone is saying "it's impossible" ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 To make it clear. This time I am searching to get an Answer why there are so much people so experienced in coding on the C64 and why not on the XL/XE. The 64 scene has always been larger than the A8 scene. There were a lot more 64s sold. For your average arcade conversion, the 64 is easier to program for. You simply need more knowledge to make Atari games look good. The 800 is more complex and has a higher learning curve. If the A8 scene were to grow, we'd see more cool productions. If you're asking why Atari games don't look as good as 64 games, the answer is that many things won't. The capabilities of the Atari can yield some amazing high-color visual effects but that doesn't always help you when your game needs a few more multi-color sprites. Out of the box, the 64 is easier to learn. The trick to programming the Atari is knowing the tricks to programming the Atari. There are fewer of us who know the hardware well, so helping people like TMR is a good thing to do! -Bry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 Bryede Belonging to the Games you are right. But I am not talking about to gain to the C64s possibilities, but the XL/XEs possibilities. You are right too, that it is possible to create games in an easier way on the C64. But what has the C64s speed to do with a realtime Rotozoomer(mentioned above)? This thing is really fast. But it is not fast due to a faster machine. It is faster due to the experienced coding. Even the more on Sprites won't help out here... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 OK let's compare to the ST. The ST was not that successfull sold like the C64... But there were not two years gone after the first shipping and the ST had Games, that ATARI never dreamed of and that gave the AMIGA a hard life. Please remember: The ST has no gaming hardware like sprites or else... .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy California Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 This time I am searching to get an Answer why there are so much people so experienced in coding on the C64 and why not on the XL/XE. In the end, I believe it really has to do with how many units were sold and what commercial support there was... It would've been different had Atari "locked" the US and UK markets in the first place. Read my last post in the "Games Are Crap" thread and let me know if you agree. ++ RC ++ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 OK let's compare to the ST.The ST was not that successfull sold like the C64... But there were not two years gone after the first shipping and the ST had Games, that ATARI never dreamed of and that gave the AMIGA a hard life. Please remember: The ST has no gaming hardware like sprites or else... .... I'd say a lot of Amiga games gave the ST a "hard life" too. I remember Amiga games being very good. -Bry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 Out of the box, the 64 is easier to learn. Actually, i'd question that to a degree because the Atari seems the easier of the two to pick up (coming from a C64 coder with 15 years under his belt!) Display lists make splitting screens easier, the DLI and the video system both make doing effects that i'd have to work at on the C64 a lot easier and setting up interrupts feels a lot easier than on the C64 too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted August 3, 2003 Share Posted August 3, 2003 OK let's compare to the ST.The ST was not that successfull sold like the C64... But there were not two years gone after the first shipping and the ST had Games, that ATARI never dreamed of and that gave the AMIGA a hard life. Please remember: The ST has no gaming hardware like sprites or else... I'd say a lot of Amiga games gave the ST a "hard life" too. I remember Amiga games being very good. Emkay's point is that the Amiga has some kick arse hardware to do games whilst the ST is pretty much the Spectrum of the 16bit market; it has no hardware smooth scroll, no sprites or blitter to move things around and a YM for sound with a 68000 to do all the pushing around. A technically good Amiga game isn't uncommon because the machine wants to run games, a good ST game takes a lot more effort because the software is having to do all the work pretty much alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 Emkay's point is that the Amiga has some kick arse hardware to do games whilst the ST is pretty much the Spectrum of the 16bit market; it has no hardware smooth scroll, no sprites or blitter to move things around and a YM for sound with a 68000 to do all the pushing around. A technically good Amiga game isn't uncommon because the machine wants to run games, a good ST game takes a lot more effort because the software is having to do all the work pretty much alone. Well, in that regard, I think a lot of the early ST and Amiga games were pretty generic and didn't need the Amiga's features. Once software houses had a few sprite & scroll routines for the ST, it became easy to produce similar quality stuff. Sure it might cost you 50% of your CPU time, but few games were all that taxing. -Bry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZylonBane Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 As old as my MCS pictures are... people like you never would have created them. That's true. People like me create 80-column VT100 emulators for our Ataris instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 Well, in that regard, I think a lot of the early ST and Amiga games were pretty generic and didn't need the Amiga's features. Once software houses had a few sprite & scroll routines for the ST, it became easy to produce similar quality stuff. Sure it might cost you 50% of your CPU time, but few games were all that taxing. A large percentage of the early Amiga games like Robocop and Wizball were just the ST version ported to run on the Amiga - they didn't take advantage of the hardware apart from improving the sound. When the Amiga coders started to lean on the extra hardware the games began to stand out a lot more. That said, a well-designed ST game which uses the machine to it's best advantage is a pretty kick-arse piece of software... i have the urge to play Wings Of Death! =-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 That said, a well-designed ST game which uses the machine to it's best advantage is a pretty kick-arse piece of software... i have the urge to play Wings Of Death! =-) Sure, but before you compare the ST to the Spectrum... look at what an ST gives the programmer: A 8MHz 68000 and a 320x200 16 color screen. Even though the ST is crude compared to the Amiga, it's still got at least as much hardware as 90% of 80's arcade games. That's why it doesn't take as much skill to program an ST as an XL or a 2600. You don't have to manage your resources in the same way. By the way, I'm glad you find the Atari easy to use. When I said it was easier to program the 64, I meant that a simple game (no tricks) would probably be easier on the 64. Once you get into advanced techniques, the Atari's features do help you out. -Bry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avram Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 My request was probably one of the C64's greatest games: Mayhem in Monsterland. Is this possible on the atari 8-bit? I'm sure DLIs could replicate the playfield but I suppose the number of enemies would be difficult to create? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heaven/TQA Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 ST Scene was similiar to C64 one... the crews like TCB, The lost boys, the union, ULM etc... pushed the ST to the limits... i just want to remember to removing the ugly ST screen borders, inventing MOD trackers, sync scrolling (hardware softscrolling)... from software houses only Thalion (a bunch of ST sceners) brought outstanding ST games like WOD or my all time fave Enchanted Land... a big disaapointment are giana sisters... amiga/c64 scrolls ST flipps screens... or compare turrican... (even i played both versions to death...) even my stars bitmap brothers did not use any advantage of the ST scene like syncscrolling (relativly easy to implement if you know how... ) thou they had brilliant scrolling games like xenon series, gods, speedball (have to double check the upcom ing GBA versions... ) a big reason for that could be the exchange of knowledge... i would compare the Atari 8bit scene little bit to the spectrum/amstrad scene... i believe that all 3 scenes started to grow with outstanding stuff when they were commercialy dead.... and the internet/emulators helped a lot... you know...amstrad coders had a lot of "out in the box" but maybe they started to pushing the limits far too late as same reason as on atari... too less coders --> too less possibility that one of them tries something new... hve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 In the end, I believe it really has to do with how many units were sold and what commercial support there was... It would've been different had Atari "locked" the US and UK markets in the first place. Read my last post in the "Games Are Crap" thread and let me know if you agree. What is the main cause of buying a computer? The first time anyone is looking at the Software he wants and buys the computer on which the programs are available. Regarding to the "Games are crap" thread, the Lucasfilm Games were the best in the time they were shipped first. I think, a lot of XL-Systems were sold this days, because people wanted to play those games. As the Games on the C64 were coded to use the enhanced features of it, anyone wanted to play that "beautyfull" games and bought the computer on that the games were available. Any discussions about marketing-lackings at ATARI are nonsens. Commodore made enough mistakes too. The C64 was sold, because of its games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 That said, a well-designed ST game which uses the machine to it's best advantage is a pretty kick-arse piece of software... i have the urge to play Wings Of Death! =-) Sure, but before you compare the ST to the Spectrum... look at what an ST gives the programmer: A 8MHz 68000 and a 320x200 16 color screen. Even though the ST is crude compared to the Amiga, it's still got at least as much hardware as 90% of 80's arcade games. i didn't mean it as a direct comparison, it's more a case of the ST being the equivalent of the Spectrum if the Amiga were the Atari or C64; there's the CPU, screen hardware and that's pretty much all she wrote on the Spectrum and ST whilst the Atari/C64 and Amiga have hardware smooth scroll, sprites, decent sound (okay, so i'm cheating somewhat using a 48K Spectrum for the comparison =-) and so forth. That's why it doesn't take as much skill to program an ST as an XL or a 2600. You don't have to manage your resources in the same way. You do relatively speaking, if you want something that's going to hold it's own against the Amiga the ST needs to be hammered pretty hard. By the way, I'm glad you find the Atari easy to use. When I said it was easier to program the 64, I meant that a simple game (no tricks) would probably be easier on the 64. Once you get into advanced techniques, the Atari's features do help you out. Depends on the game really, a scrolling dodge-the-background game would be easier on the Atari despite my insisting on handling the scrolling map like i would on the C64... =-) i could probably knock something like that out in a few days, but it would be a very poor game so i don't really see the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 As old as my MCS pictures are... people like you never would have created them. That's true. People like me create 80-column VT100 emulators for our Ataris instead. Woa... I'm impressed... standard programming Good looking C64 Gameadaptions would have been more usefull for the 8-Bits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 What is the main cause of buying a computer? The first time anyone is looking at the Software he wants and buys the computer on which the programs are available. Very true, when i was involved with computer sales we shifted incredible numbers of Amigas just by showing people Shadow Of The Beast on the Amiga and comparing it to the ST. Probably not a fair comparison since the game was fairly weak and the ST version a rush job (there was a demo soon after that nuked it for the scrolling) but an A2000 hooked into a decent amp with Beast running shifted a lot of hardware... Any discussions about marketing-lackings at ATARI are nonsens. Commodore made enough mistakes too. The C64 was sold, because of its games. Commodore sucked when it came to marketing, how many companies can you think of would take a machine as successful as the C64 and try to market another unit against it?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 My request was probably one of the C64's greatest games: Mayhem in Monsterland. Is this possible on the atari 8-bit? I'm sure DLIs could replicate the playfield but I suppose the number of enemies would be difficult to create? It wouldn't be possible to replicate the graphics perfectly because MiM mixes 320x200 and 160x200 graphics and throws character colour around like it's going out of style, but with some redesigning to drop details it'd be possible to implement a less colourful version of what's already there. Enemies could be a mixture of software sprites and players (probably more the former than the latter) so the background redesign could also allow for that by leaving channels they can move through where there's no detail to make things easier. Suffice to say it would be a total re-code, the C64 version uses a VSP scroller for speed (it can pull 8 pixels a frame 50FPS moving about 2000 bytes of screen and colour map around) so the Atari would need to have it's own screen handlers - i'm not sure the map would fit easily into a load without the tile compression... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted August 4, 2003 Share Posted August 4, 2003 My request was probably one of the C64's greatest games: Mayhem in Monsterland. Is this possible on the atari 8-bit? I'm sure DLIs could replicate the playfield but I suppose the number of enemies would be difficult to create? It would be possible without any hires at the gamescreen. The colors would slightly differ from the C64 version. But don't put to much hope into DLIs. To gain the best results in graphics, PM overlay with Charmode is a must. Quote 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
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.