Jump to content
IGNORED

thrusti v1.0


Recommended Posts

here it is... i just forgot a simple CLI... as g2f kernel sets the interrupt flag...

 

i still want to improve the g2f pictures and insert a RMT module at the beginning... and last but not least pack it with superpacker...

 

can some of you test the gameplay if the levels are not corrupt due to the patching?

 

you can exit the g2f by pressing START... (how can i check if ANY key is pressed? i would like to use SPACE like in the main menu of thrust... instead of start)

 

have fun...

thrusti.zip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here it is... i just forgot a simple CLI... as g2f kernel sets the interrupt flag...

 

i still want to improve the g2f pictures and insert a RMT module at the beginning... and last but not least pack it with superpacker...

 

can some of you test the gameplay if the levels are not corrupt due to the patching?

 

you can exit the g2f by pressing START... (how can i check if ANY key is pressed? i would like to use SPACE like in the main menu of thrust... instead of start)

 

have fun...

 

 

While "optimizing" Thrust you may import the C64 tune and switch the game to high-resolution with PM underlays...

:twisted: ;) :ponder:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole level-design is build for hires(320x200)... even on the A8 and you don't see what is necessary for the gameplay as it was intended by the designers.

Do you spew nonsense like this on purpose, or are you really this scatter-brained? Simply halving the horizontal resolution doesn't affect the gameplay of Thrust at all. Even the 2600 version, which runs at 1/8 the horizontal resolution, plays fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you spew nonsense like this on purpose, or are you really this scatter-brained? Simply halving the horizontal resolution doesn't affect the gameplay of Thrust at all. Even the 2600 version, which runs at 1/8 the horizontal resolution, plays fine.

 

Do you allways talk or write to yourself?

You can do so without writing into this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you might see on the screenshots (and link) above, the A8 version does not show all substantial elements (horizontal. and vertical.) for the correct playability.

Even the C16 version is done in "hires" and the 2600er version has the correct aspect ratio at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I know the A8 got a craptasic port of Thrust. The fact that they distorted the levels was entirely due to programmer laziness, not anything magical about the original resolution.

 

There's a big difference between saying something was designed AT a given resolution, and saying it was designed FOR a given resolution.

 

Please say something nonsensical in response to this post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a big difference between saying something was designed AT a given resolution, and saying it was designed FOR a given resolution.

 

And there is a big difference if you can move 160 or 320 pixels horizontally.

:roll:

 

The game is simply spreaded to the double to have the same "game" resolution... so it works exactly as the designers intended with their levels.

Reducing the resolution does make the playability less exactly.

T.Jentsch must have heavily cheated on the 2600 version which seems to be a lot easier than the C16, C64, ST, AMIGA versions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

T.Jentsch must have heavily cheated on the 2600 version which seems to be a lot easier than the C16, C64, ST, AMIGA versions.

Easier? :?

 

Nice to see that you are interested in this thread ;)

Can you explain by some simple words what was necessary to convert the Game-resolution?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Easier? :?

Nice to see that you are interested in this thread ;)

Can you explain by some simple words what was necessary to convert the Game-resolution?

Yes, but only after you answer my question. ;)

 

Hm...

 

The movement ist faster and the balancing between Ship and cargo is more simple to adjust.

The Enemy-bases are shooting less precisely.

My personal problem when playing Thrust is to eliminate the bases and been blasted away "myself" before eliminating them. This problem is not there in the "2600 Thrust" .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The movement ist faster and the balancing between Ship and cargo is more simple to adjust.

Yes, that's probably due to having to simplify the physics quite a bit.

 

The Enemy-bases are shooting less precisely.

Actually the are shoting totally random. ;)

 

My personal problem when playing Thrust is to eliminate the bases and been blasted away "myself" before eliminating them. This problem is not there in the "2600 Thrust" .

Due to hardware limitations there are only two simultaneous enemy shots allowed. Combined with random shooting this makes the bases less dangerous.

 

I hope the game is not too easy for you. :)

 

:idea: Back to your question:

The biggest problem was the scrolling cave.

 

Fortunately the cave doesn't need the full 320 pixel resolution, since the line lengths are always multiples of 4, so the effective resolution was only 80x4 pixel.

 

Unfortunately the playfield graphics allow only 40 pixel. But to make the kernel work, I had to reduce the number of lines anyway. So by deleting every 2nd line, the result matches the playfield graphics exactly.

 

The scrolling effect was a problem, because I couldn't smooth scroll horizontally. Only in coarse 4 pixel steps, which IMO doesn't look very good (e.g. 2600 Vanguard). So I am using "delayed scrolling" now, waiting until the ship gets close to a border and then rapidly (30Hz) scroll until the ship is close to the opposite border. AFAIK this tricks is new for the 2600 and I was quite proud of it (though IIRC I got the idea from the C64 original).

 

For the other objects I had to experiment a bit to make them smaller (only 8 pixel wide, single color). Especially the rotating ship graphics took quite a while until they looked ok.

 

To avoid objects being on the same horizontal space (which would have required flickering them), the level layouts had to be changed slightly. But I kept them as close as possible to the C64 original.

 

In a nutshell: I was quite lucky, since the original C64 game was a very good choice for a port.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Heaven. ...

 

Nice to see revamped & patched games.. more more..

 

As for revamping the actual in-game graphics, sounds like quite an undertaking. I suppose a mono 320x160 C64 port would be quite possible with PM overlays added.

 

All power to you if you have the programming skills to rip these games apart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose a mono 320x160 C64 port...

 

320x200... For porting purposes, check the C16 version; it runs totally without hardware sprites and is a more accurate conversion of the game. =-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TMR 320x200... For porting purposes, check the C16 version; it runs totally without hardware sprites and is a more accurate conversion of the game. =-)
Yes the C16 version is much better. It would be great to see a "Graphics 8" version on the A8 even in mono without overlays. The out of proportion screen layout on the released A8 version was disapointing but us A8 users were used to being let down.

post-4724-1085274698_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...