qix

[onklsven75]

Does anyone know if there was ever a pal version of qix made for the 2600? I've always liked that game for the 5200.

 

[ 02-26-2002: Message edited by: onklsven75 ]

[MattyXB]

There is no 5200 PAL console avaible. So there is too no PAL game avaible.

 

Or I am wrong with the PAL 5200? I know that this is not avaible in germany, maybe in other PAL countrys.

 

Maybe for other consoles.

[slapdash]

There weren't ANY versions of Qix for the 2600. I'm still not entirely convinced that it could be done, but I would have liked to have seen it, that's for sure.

[Thomas Jentzsch]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ Perry Jr:

There weren't ANY versions of Qix for the 2600. I'm still not entirely convinced that it could be done, but I would have liked to have seen it, that's for sure.

---

I have thought about doing a 2600 version of Qix myself (because I love the game idea), but the limitations of the 2600 make it impossible without a LOT of flicker.

[moycon]

Yes I think we discussed this a few months back. Many people argued they thought it would be next to impossible....How bout Pepper 2? It was similar to Amidar. Perhaps that would be a game that could be made?? In any case no Pal version of Qix exists but dont feel bad...No NTSC version exists either.

[Paul Slocum]

Thomas: How were you picturing Qix on the 2600?

 

-Paul

[MattyXB]

Yes, please make a Qix for the Atari 2600 VCS Thomas. I will buy it. And when it flicker this not so importend.

[The Night Phantom]

Indeed, flickering Sparx would be rather appropriate, and I think a flickering Qix (or two ) wouldn't be so bad either.

[ubersaurus]

yeah, and having the lines flicker until they get filled in would work.

[Scott Stilphen]

It's been long rumored that Atari planned a version for the 2600, even with a CX# of 26156 (which later turned out to be for Combat Two). I don't think a version is that out of the question.

[Tempest]

I was always kind of surprised they never did a version of Qix for the 2600. It's not a graphically complex game. I suppose all that filling in and such could be done with BG graphics. Someone should really try it.

 

Tempest

[Thomas Jentzsch]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Smart Patrol:

Thomas: How were you picturing Qix on the 2600?

---

If you know the Supercharger game Stell-A-Sketch you get the idea.

[Thomas Jentzsch]

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Night Phantom:

Indeed, flickering Sparx would be rather appropriate, and I think a flickering Qix (or two ) wouldn't be so bad either.

---

The problem is, that the whole filled areas had to flicker. And that is very annoying.

 

Yes, you could try to reduce that with mixing playfield and player graphics, but that makes the kernel extremely complicated (or impossible) and requires some rather complicated setup code for the kernel too.

 

In the end, I didn't find a solution to do it that way.

[The Night Phantom]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thomas Jentzsch:

The problem is, that the

whole

filled areas had to flicker. And that is very annoying.

 

Yes, you could try to reduce that with mixing playfield and player graphics, but that makes the kernel extremely complicated (or impossible) and requires some rather complicated setup code for the kernel too.

 

In the end, I didn't find a solution to do it that way.

---

 

As always, I'm glad Thomas is out there making this sort of effort.

 

Thomas, can you compare/contrast this situation with the display of, say, the “dots” (frequently undotlike) in the Pac-Man games or the “mushrooms” in Centipede and Millipede? As a minimally informed 2600 programming layman, it seems to me that similar techniques could be used in a 2600 Qix as well.

[Thomas Jentzsch]

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Night Phantom:

Thomas, can you compare/contrast this situation with the display of, say, the “dots” (frequently undotlike) in the Pac-Man games or the “mushrooms” in

Centipede

and

Millipede

? As a minimally informed 2600 programming layman, it seems to me that similar techniques could be used in a 2600

Qix

as well.

---

The difference is, that the "dots" of Pac Man and Centipede are rastered (1 dot = 4 pixel). That means, the horizontal positions and sizes are not flexible. But for Qix you need that flexibility in both directions.

If you accept rastering in horizontal direction the game would become different, more like Amidar.

[utamav91]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thomas Jentzsch:

I have thought about doing a 2600 version of Qix myself (because I love the game idea), but the limitations of the 2600 make it impossible without a LOT of flicker.

 

Would flicker such a bad thing on Qix? It would add some mystery and personality to Qix. If they can do like 6 missles streaming down on Missle Command with very little flicker, and a whole big sections of snake on surround without any flicker, it shouldn't be too difficult. It's not a game that requires much color, so you could nearly a B/W version and it would still rock.

[DEBRO]

Qix would be a good game for the 2600 but I think it would be a challenge to pull off.

 

Qix uses 2 colors for the playfield to denote the score for the area that was captured. Doing this on the 2600 would cause flicker. The kernal would have to be designed to show one part of the playfield at a time if they are on the same scan line. Sort of like Andrew Davie's PUSH Demo. I wonder if Gene Johannsen 8x8 Grid demo could be used here. He does some cool RAM manipulations. Of course that would eat into your massive 128 bytes Now of course you could get a way with using one color for captured area and I don't think anyone would mind.

 

The lines that are drawn would have to be done by some sort of P/M graphics. The playfield has 4 pixel horizontal resolution. This just wouldn't work for Qix. If you did this then you would get flicker like Bob Colbert's Stell-A-Sketch as Thomas mentioned before. Not too bad.

 

Now as for the Qix that would be difficult. What would you use? Playfield graphics don't have the resolution needed so you would have to use P/M graphics again. Talk about a difficult kernal. What about when the player advances to levels where 2 Qix are in the playfield at once

[Thomas Jentzsch]

quote:

---

Originally posted by utamav91:

Would flicker such a bad thing on Qix? It would add some mystery and personality to Qix. If they can do like 6 missles streaming down on Missle Command with very little flicker, and a whole big sections of snake on surround without any flicker, it shouldn't be too difficult. It's not a game that requires much color, so you could nearly a B/W version and it would still rock.

---

Color is no problem. The problem compared to Missile Command is, that large areas had to flicker. In Surround they used low resolution playfiled graphics, which won't work for Qix.

 

Look at Stell-A-Sketch with large areas filled, the flicker is IMO horrible.

[Cybergoth]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thomas Jentzsch:

In

Surround

they used low resolution playfiled graphics, which won't work for

Qix

.

---

 

Hm... why not, actually? You could fill out free rectangles just like the ones in amidar. To get some action into the game, you could make it more like the C64 classic "Zolyx". And if you'd allow the same flicker as on the Gunfight bullets, you could probably do up to 10 Zolyx particles on the screen!

 

Check this out:

 

Lemon 64 Zolyx Review

 

Greetings,

Manuel

[Paul Slocum]

How about you use an inverted version of what StellaSketch does. So the whole screen flickers at first, but captured areas are the background color. That way, as you do good in the game, you're rewarded by less flicker!

 

-Paul

 

[ 02-27-2002: Message edited by: Smart Patrol ]

[Cybergoth]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Smart Patrol:

How about you use an inverted version of what StellaSketch does. So the whole screen flickers at first, but captured areas are the background color. That way, as you do good in the game, you're rewarded by less flicker!

---

 

Problem with doing it the Stell-a-Sketch way is, that you can't release the finished game on cartridge. IMHO it's not rewarding enough, if the final product won't result in a cartridge. That's why I'll never ever do a Supercharger game.

 

Greetings,

Manuel

[Paul Slocum]

We need Chris Wilkson to finish his Superchip board.

 

-Paul

[Jess Ragan]

I tend to think the game would be asking too much of the 2600. However, I kinda think you could get away with creating inside borders for the finished boxes rather than filling them entirely. You know, make unfinished lines white, slowly drawn lines two shades of orange, and fast draws two shades of blue.

However, I'm with the guy who said he'd like a 2600 conversion of Satan's Hollow. It'd work pretty well on the system since it's not all that complicated, but very intense.

 

JR

 

P.S. Here's something I've never been able to understand... just how do you make the computer determine where to fill in the boxes? Sure, it's easy enough to just say, "Start filling this box at this point on the screen", but how do you make the machine understand where the center of the shape is? Do you have to keep track of every point on the shape and average them out to get the center? I've never been able to figure that out.

[Thomas Jentzsch]

Manuel has shown me another version of Qix: Jezzball.

 

This game was part of the Windows Entertainment Pack. A 2600 version could easily be done without major flicker.

 

I don't find it very thrilling, but what do you think? Is it worth to be done for the 2600?

[Channel 2]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thomas Jentzsch:

Manuel has shown me another version of Qix:

Jezzball

.

---

 

I don't know Qix, but I was pretty good at Jezzball at one time. How is Qix different from Jezzball?