Which post-2600 Atari console do you like best?

[agradeneu]

40 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

 

 

Various objects and all the buildings are polygons, you can view them at multiple angles, they are all filled, close up there's limited texturing, and one of the vehicles is also made up polygons though more flat and pixelated.

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, they are just shifting left and right and objects look like pixelated sprites to me. It's pseudo 3D IMO. 

Stunt Car Racer is a full 3D engine, the cars and tracks are polygons and the camera rotates. Just look at the ST and Amiga versions as well. It's not convincing to me that you think this was less demanding. Actually it's more math to handle for the CPU IMO. Would be interesting what an actual 3D programmer has to say about this.

Edited October 3, 2021 by agradeneu

[+Muddyfunster]

  

1 hour ago, Leeroy ST said:

You wouldn't make this poor argument with the Jaguar, why is the XEGS different?

We're not talking about the Jaguar are we? I'm not making the poor argument. Let's recap a second :

 

You are the one stating categorically that the 7800 is better at 3d than the A8 range. But....You offer nothing to back that statement up. 

 

That is the definition of a poor argument.  You do this kind of thing a lot in different threads. You made uninformed statements (that's ok, freedom of expression I guess), but if anyone disagrees, you jump all over them, usually with some magazine articles thrown in to prove your sage words. If they disagree further, or enter into any kind of contrary discussion, you normally resort to name calling and general assholery. People don't have to look hard to find the evidence, at least the evidence that hasn't been removed by the Mods.

Which brings me to my next point :

 

1 hour ago, Leeroy ST said:

This is what happens when YOU the accuser are uninformed and think you're smarter than you actually are. Resulting in dishonest tactics and trying to spin the argument.

(again, sigh).. So you are accusing me of being an "accuser" and being "dishonest" now, or using "dishonest tactics" ? Huh?. Do you check what you write before you click post ?

 

You know where that went last time you repeatedly accused me of lying and being deceitful when you couldn't evidence it? Right?

 

So, you can either present evidence of my dishonesty or apologise. I'll be flagging your post to the mods again as you simply cannot go around accusing anyone that has a contrary position of being a liar or being dishonest. Well, you can, but I don't think it's going to end well for you.

 

You made a statement, here let me remind you : 

 

On 9/28/2021 at 2:51 PM, Leeroy ST said:

The 7800 was better in sprites, Parallax, Pseudo 3D and 3D, let's not downplay the power difference.

 

Prove it  That's all.

 

57 minutes ago, agradeneu said:

No, they are just shifting left and right and objects are pixelated sprites. It's pseudo 3D IMO. 

Stunt Car Racer is a full 3D engine, the cars and tracks are polygons and the camera rotates. Just look at the ST and Amiga versions as well. It's not convincing to me that you think this was less demanding. Actually it's more math to handle for the CPU IMO. Would be interesting what an actual 3D programmer has to say about this.

Yep, this is my point. Something like SCR is 3d. Technically the 7800 can do 3d (of course it can) but doing so is more difficult even with the fact its processing power is similar to the A8 due to the 7800s display and underlying architecture. There are many more factors in play such as accessing the screen, DMA, Maria etc. Most 3d games irrespective of platform use tricks like data tables for fast math or trig functions, even ones which are "true 3d" like SCR and others. Often this involves using RAM, (I think SCR is a 128k game) something the A8's have way more of compared to a 7800 (4k unless you are using on cart RAM, which is then generally 16k or at best 2x 16k banks). 

 

The 7800 is great with sprites and tiles, its display architecture is optimised as such. 

 

F18 on the 7800 manages around 4-5 fps on average, that's using 25% of the screen only, rest is static HUD. (common cheat, reduces the amount of crap to draw each frame).

 

The "poly's" (I'm not convinced it's all poly) are only ever viewable from 4 angles from what I can see so there is no true 3d space where you can see the world from any angle or height (like you can in SCR). The 3d space feels flat and forced.

 

Saying the 7800 is better than the A8 at 3d is uniformed, actually it's incorrect. On paper they have similar processing capability for the CPU, in practice it's harder for the 7800 to produce anything even close to SCR or what the A8 can do.

 

Edited October 3, 2021 by Muddyfunster

[Leeroy ST]

18 minutes ago, Muddyfunster said:

  

Let's get something clear. I'm not making the poor argument.

 

You are the one stating categorically that the 7800 is better at 3d than the A8 range. You offer nothing to back that statement up.

Rest of your post is an attempt to roll the subject.

 

This is very simple, you are the one that has nothing to back up their position.

 

I have in execution the 7800 software title F18 Hornet.

 

Since you think you're informed all you have to do is show that obviously more technically demanding game on the XEGS or earlier A8 line computers. It's really just that simple.

 

All you're doing so far is making pointless paragraphs trying to confuse the topic to act like your winning an imaginary argument, you're not.

 

You either can show the obviously technically impressive commercial release that's more demanding than F18 on 7800, or you admit you put your foot in your mouth.

 

You're only supporting the position no one had been able to produce a comparable or better software title. That's why you tried shifting the posts earlier to a less demanding game that "may" run worse on the 7800 because of hardware features of the A8 line, but that is the same as saying a game on 3DO being better than on PSX because it took advantage of the formers hardware features proves the former is more powerful than the latter.

 

We both know that's false

 

Remember your informed, but can't find that game to prove you are.

 

1 hour ago, agradeneu said:

No, they are just shifting left and right and objects look like pixelated sprites to me. It's pseudo 3D IMO. 

 

You're ignorance is noted, but the gifs of the game have already been posted in the 7800 subforum thread about this same game. Also it's been talked about here and other sites in the past, Several objects and all the buildings are polygons, you can look at them from multiple angles, they are solid, they are not sprites. Including one enemy as well. There are however SOME other enemies and some other objects are sprites that scale in.

 

However to say the polygons are shifting sprites is nonsense. In that thread there is even a gif of a player going past a building and you can view part of the side and the shadows as you go past and nothing shifts around, it's a polygon object you are literally passing and moving away from.

 

And considering you can flip the plane south you can see the front and back of the polygons as well.

 

Any write up on the game talks about polygons, you'd think someone somewhere would call them sprites if they were shifting sprites as you say.

 

Strange how only you came to this conclusion over the years they were sprites. Hmmm.

 

[NoBloodyXLOrE]

1 hour ago, Leeroy ST said:

If XEGS was two years earlier the turn into computer feature may have been a good deal, especially if it retained an old price. It would also be when the 16-bits were new with problems and weren't so hot out the gate.

 

By end of 87, so may as well be 88, you are basically selling a machine that can turn into an A8 or C64 (which many already had) with the Amiga and cheaper ST now with more software and better pricing.

 

In Europe there would be even more options making the Xegs computer hybrid approach even more irrelevant. 

 

They really should have just went all in on Xegs being a game machine imo.

 

 

I definitely agree with your points here, that it would've been far more successful if it was launched earlier, and/or with the emphasis shifted to being a high-end game console that can be cheaply upgraded into a real computer, since by 1987, as we've said, its computer features were more-or-less irrelevant.

Remember that the XEGS had comparable sound capabilities to the NES, with graphical capabilities that were almost as good, plus far more RAM and comparable storage, so, controller notwithstanding, it would've been capable of NES-style games (I remember seeing a very impressive Super Mario Bros demo with music, smooth action, and colorful and detailed graphics, with a zoomed-in playfield being the only compromise).

The XEGS didn't fail because of its hardware, or even really its marketing (which didn't do any favors, admittedly, but didn't kill it), it failed because of its software. The Atari 8-bit line hadn't received much attention as far as software since 1984, with most of its best games released up to that point, but not after, and the kind of arcade-perfect (or very nearly) ports were certainly very impressive back then, but the NES could deliver similar results for those and had a line of new games, that they didn't license to Atari, like Super Mario Bros.

[+Muddyfunster]

 

End of the day, this isn't about me needing to prove some game to be more technically demanding than F18 - that's your smokescreen demand to move away from your uninformed statement.

 

Here, let me remind you what you said again :

 

On 9/28/2021 at 2:51 PM, Leeroy ST said:

The 7800 was better in sprites, Parallax, Pseudo 3D and 3D, let's not downplay the power difference.

 

Nothing there requires me to list any game that's more technically impressive than 7800's F18 on the A8. That's your invention to deflect away from your uninformed statement.

 

I'll wait for you to back that up  or, you can admit you put your foot in your mouth, to use your own words.

 

Also still waiting for you to prove my dishonesty for the world to see. 

 

 

Edited October 3, 2021 by Muddyfunster

[Leeroy ST]

12 minutes ago, Muddyfunster said:

 

End of the day, this isn't about me needing to prove some game to be more technically demanding that F18 - that's your smokescreen demand to move away from your uninformed statement.

So you have nothing.

 

See the problem is F18 proves it's more capable 3D, which is why it was mentioned, but you're trying to twist things to make it seem like it doesn't. That was always the point from the start despite you acting obtuse/disingenuous.

 

But you don't have a game that showcases otherwise despite it being obvious to you. It's also clear at this point you never will.

 

Remember you're informed, but can't find the software to support you are informed.

 

I mean you brought up SCR again yet it's not as demanding as F18. 

 

So I'll take this as a concession. Since you don't have the moral compass to admit you have nothing.

 

Now since you lost that discussion, even though you won't admit it, we could use the 2D flight simulators on the 7800 to prove it can do better than XEGS and friends at pseudo-3D too.

 

But I guess you won't have a game to counter those either? 

 

Maybe the problem is you think you're informed.

Edited October 3, 2021 by Leeroy ST

[agradeneu]

25 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

Rest of your post is an attempt to roll the subject.

 

This is very simple, you are the one that has nothing to back up their position.

 

Blahablahblah.....

 

Remember when Atari hired you to "increase sprite quality" of Bubsy for the Jaguar, and you could not back up your claims? No credits, nothing? 

Why someone like you is complaining about dishonesty?  

And now you have established  yourself  an expert for 3D on the 7800, ok, I get the pattern.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 3, 2021 by agradeneu

[+Muddyfunster]

 

1 minute ago, Leeroy ST said:

So you have nothing.

 

See the problem is F18 proves it's more capable but you're trying to twist things to make it seem like it doesn't. That was always the point from the start despite you acting obtuse/disingenuous.

 

But you don't have a game that showcases otherwise despite it being obvious to you. It's also clear at this point you never will.

 

Remember you're informed, but can't find the software to support you are informed.

 

So I'll take this as a concession. Since you don't have the moral compass to admit you have nothing.

 

Now since you lost that discussion, even though you won't admit it, we could use the 2D flight simulators on the 7800 to prove it can do better than XEGS and friends at pseudo-3D too.

 

But I guess you won't have a game to counter those either? 

 

Maybe the problem is you think you're informed.

You see, this imaginary argument you want me to prove is your creation. It exists in your head only, it's a deflection away from your uniformed comment. I'm not going to enter into any kind of debate with you, not because I have no way to prove you wrong (really, believe me, that isn't difficult  ), but I refuse to continue a discussion with some like you that treats other forum users they way you do. You accuse me of being a liar, a deciever and of being dishonest and they you expect me to be "oh, sure Leeroy, you da bomb, he's my thoughts, hope you approve". H

 

You talk about rolling, re-read your last post, you just awarded yourself the winners medal for god knows what and threw in some more insults. It's cool, I just keep reporting them, sooner or later you will get banned.

 

You take my refusal to engage with you as a concession? of what ? What discussion did I lose? I wasn't aware I was even having a discussion with you, I was simply pointing out the uniformed ignorance of your comment. Honestly, you should seek help, I think you have serious issues.

 

You've posted nothing to back your original statement up.

Here, let me remind you : 

 

 

On 9/28/2021 at 2:51 PM, Leeroy ST said:

The 7800 was better in sprites, Parallax, Pseudo 3D and 3D, let's not downplay the power difference.

 

Nothing there requires me or anyone else to list any game that's more technically impressive than F18 on the 7800. That's your invention. 

Back that first comment up, or accept you were wrong.

 

For my part, I don't have the crayons or the time to continue this. 

[James Vontor]

I see bias do the same dance over and over.

 

What is available does not mean the machine is limited to that standards.

 

Shenmue demo showed that Saturn could go farther than what most developer put out. 

 

It was not limited to games like Bug 2 or Megamix like people thought in the bad press or bias web forums.

 

Sega Saturn had problem making game development difficult at time. But that does not mean it could not go further because games available did not figure it out.

 

Using a game on one system to say this is why hardware is better on the other makes no sense  that only works for real generation jumps.

 

It's like me doing the reverse example using the very bland 7800 version of scrapyard dog. 

 

Virtua Racing looks better than Club drive, is 32X hardware stronger than Jaguar now? No! What are you doing then?