89 replies to this topic

[doctorclu]

You ever tried Club Drive or World Tour Racing?   Trust me, split screen is not the friend to the Jaguar.

[JagChris]

doctorclu, on Sun Sep 18, 2011 1:50 PM, said:

You ever tried Club Drive or World Tour Racing?   Trust me, split screen is not the friend to the Jaguar.

Probably after a second generation attempt I'm sure it would be much better but considering, WTR split screen isnt all that bad for a first go.

[Willard]

there are some other split screen games that are okay on the technical end I think (Atari Karts, Spacewar until it crashes, Maybe I-War but it's a little sluggy). Still, I remember playing alot of split-screen games in the 90's like Goldeneye and Winback, they were great. A space shooter like battlesphere seems like one of the easiest genres to integrate split-screen mode into. If you could link up two consoles that both allowed 4-player split screen you could have an 8-player game going on a 2 console network. I think something like that would be very interesting.

[Austin]

If BS was re-released, I would probably buy two copies, if only because of its allure that's been built up in my mind after over a decade of it being available.

DCUltrapro, on Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:22 AM, said:

it is a little crazy that back in those days some companies actually thought that normal people would be able to run a setup for 8, much less 16!! you have to wonder what they were smoking. When I had my Jag when I was younger I knew maybe 2 people who were interested in getting one, much less owning one and a game like this lol

My guess is that it was more of something they did just because they could, not so much as it was about what they were smoking.

[Willard]

Austin, on Sun Sep 18, 2011 4:11 PM, said:

My guess is that it was more of something they did just because they could, not so much as it was about what they were smoking.

well, no company does something "just because they can," lol, they usually have a profit motivation. Atari probably thought something along the lines of "console networking is going to be big and we don't want to get left behind." It never was, and not too many companies really pushed it in terms of software support and marketing (although you might notice that quite a few post-jaguar consoles actually do support networking).

That's one of the pitfalls of trying to jump inbetween generations since you kind of have to direct consumer perceptions and nail spot on what's going to take off next.

Austin, on Sun Sep 18, 2011 4:11 PM, said:

If BS was re-released, I would probably buy two copies, if only because of its allure that's been built up in my mind after over a decade of it being available.

That's why I'd want 2 more... even though I already have 1. I have a feeling the cycle would start back up all over again

Edited by Willard, Sun Sep 18, 2011 5:03 PM.

[JagChris]

Willard, on Sun Sep 18, 2011 2:36 PM, said:

there are some other split screen games that are okay on the technical end I think (Atari Karts, Spacewar until it crashes, Maybe I-War but it's a little sluggy). Still, I remember playing alot of split-screen games in the 90's like Goldeneye and Winback, they were great. A space shooter like battlesphere seems like one of the easiest genres to integrate split-screen mode into. If you could link up two consoles that both allowed 4-player split screen you could have an 8-player game going on a 2 console network. I think something like that would be very interesting.

You'd have to talk to t-bird about that to see how well something like Bs could do in split screen.Imagining WTR redone (say a WTR 2.0 or somesuch) with all the latest tricks used for it it would probably look more decent than we'd imagine. Not PSX or Saturn levels but probably way smoother even iin split screen.

[JagChris]

Willard, on Sun Sep 18, 2011 2:36 PM, said:

there are some other split screen games that are okay on the technical end I think (Atari Karts, Spacewar until it crashes, Maybe I-War but it's a little sluggy). Still, I remember playing alot of split-screen games in the 90's like Goldeneye and Winback, they were great. A space shooter like battlesphere seems like one of the easiest genres to integrate split-screen mode into. If you could link up two consoles that both allowed 4-player split screen you could have an 8-player game going on a 2 console network. I think something like that would be very interesting.

I'm sure the Jaguar can do way better split screen than we've seen. At least in smoothness. But also Nintendo and those others mentioned had newer more powerful 3d systems along with all that developer support. I-war uses a lot of the 68k also doesnt it?

[DCUltrapro]

so how does link up on the jag actually work? Apart from the obvious need to have 1 console per player and 1 tv etc, how do they actually connect? can it only be connected within a short distance or can it actually be networked? I'm interested now

[Willard]

JagChris, on Sun Sep 18, 2011 11:29 PM, said:

You'd have to talk to t-bird about that to see how well something like Bs could do in split screen.Imagining WTR redone (say a WTR 2.0 or somesuch) with all the latest tricks used for it it would probably look more decent than we'd imagine. Not PSX or Saturn levels but probably way smoother even iin split screen.

I'm sure it's possible to get a split screen mode incorporated into battlesphere, although it might just be a maximum of 4 human players and no AI opponents. Even that would have been good for a few plays every once in awhile. But yea, it'd be necessary to ask thunderbird to determine exactly how many of the current modes could be adapted to a full 4-player split screen experience or how much they'd need to be comprimised. Just the thought seems interesting to me though (kind of like the thought of a reprint of battlesphere seems interesting to other people lol).

DCUltrapro, on Mon Sep 19, 2011 2:53 AM, said:

so how does link up on the jag actually work? Apart from the obvious need to have 1 console per player and 1 tv etc, how do they actually connect? can it only be connected within a short distance or can it actually be networked? I'm interested now

For a 2-player network all you need is a Jaglink. If more than that, you need a catbox, scatbox, or Jaglink 2. The only networkable game that uses an alternate device is Ultra Vortek. It requires a Jaguar Voice Modem (about 200 protos were made), and allows you to connect (locally) through a telephone line.

[DCUltrapro]

thats mad, so are those boxes you mention all official released atari items or just 3rd parties? is it only Battle Sphere that would use them or can any jag game with 2 player or more? Stupid question, I mean does the game have to say on the box that it supports the feature? I guess it probably does

[Willard]

DCUltrapro, on Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:17 AM, said:

thats mad, so are those boxes you mention all official released atari items or just 3rd parties? is it only Battle Sphere that would use them or can any jag game with 2 player or more? Stupid question, I mean does the game have to say on the box that it supports the feature? I guess it probably does

It should be noted that if you are running a network, every console needs a network device (catbox, jaglink, scatbox .etc). The Jaglink is the only device that is limited to a 2 console network because it only has one input line.

Jaglink - Official atari product - 2 players only
Catbox - Officially licensed 3rd party device - 2+ players - supports other feature (S-video/monitor/composite)
Jaglink 2 - Homebrew device - 2+ players
Scatbox - Homebrew device (made by the battlesphere devs) - 2+ players - supports other features (s-video/monitor/composite)

Games that network:

Aircars: 2+ players (clean, network code by battlesphere devs))
Battlesphere: 2+ players (clean, network code by battlesphere devs)
Doom: 2 Players (buggy, prone to reset and interruptions)

[Isgoed]

Willard, are you sure that Battlesphere has clean network code?

[Willard]

i did not experience any interruptions or network resets while we were playing (several hours, although it wouldn't make sense to go through that trouble of getting the TV's etc together just to play for a few minutes!). Of course, I have not taken a look at the code, nor could I interpret it if I did. Just a end-user perspective.

I was unable to get very far in doom though, very bad network reliability.

[PeterG]

Isgoed, on Wed Sep 21, 2011 10:15 AM, said:

Willard, are you sure that Battlesphere has clean network code?

The BS network runs very stable and over long periods of time (especially compared to Doom but that should be a given). Haven't played enough of Aircars in Network but since it has the same underlying code it should be as stable as BS.

I encountered some glitches though in certain circumstances, don't know if it had something to do with linking up a copy of BS classic and one of BSG or if it is triggered by something completly different. One or two times we encountered a ship which would not move, would not be hit and destroyed by fire and would not have any hit detection whatsoever. It was present on one players screen while not be seen by the other. But from what I have seen this seems to be a glitch which doesn't occur on regular basis otherwise probably more people would have talked about it. From my experience the network is as stable as it need to be to have many hours of fun. (Not saying that doom isn't fun, but the constant crahes where rather annoying)

Talking of glitches, I once encountered another glitch in BS in single player and it was pretty cool. Can't remember which wave of gauntlet it was but I had everything destroyed aside of one pilot. Next time I see the pilot flying by it had what looked like the 4Play Starbase around him and it was blinking. So the little pilot was at the centre of the Starbase and flying around ( the bases don't move usually) That was a weird and pretty cool glitch, almost thought it was intentional.

[omf]

GeneralMurdock, on Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:05 PM, said:

I saw lots of times people saying that it uses some special chip but I think this is BS/BS. Correct me if I'm wrong, please.

93C86 eeprom

[Gunstar]

Willard, on Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:31 PM, said:

JagChris, on Fri Sep 9, 2011 8:36 PM, said:

If Battlesphere Gold was released for $100 en mass they would most likely have people eventually buying multiple Jags and multiple copies just to play linkup. Its a shame.

At a point I had 3 copies of battlesphere and played on a network only once. IMO it's just as good of a game in single player mode, as Scato apparently spend a bit of time on the AI.

I think you have to remember that the network code was written before the tramiels sold the Atari label. The expectation was that the game would be mass produced and that you would take Battlesphere over to your friends house and link up there. I don't think it's realistic to assume that anybody would have purchase 16 copies of the game, 16 catboxes, and 16 TV's for the full multiplayer experience - either now or back when it was supposed to be released. It's def. cool for shows and such, but a little overkill just for a personal setup.

It'd be nice if it was sold at a more affordable price, but honestly I think it's a big exaggeration to say that you would get "alot of people buying multiple copies of a mass produced game for $100, or less." Maybe if people know that the game would have a limited print. But not mass produced.

No, not a lot of people buying multiple copies, at least back then, but if the Jag had been a hit with a million copies of the game eventually sold, people would have gotten together eventually to have large networks, like happened on the Mac with Marathon. Not to mention that if BS had been "massed produced," even to the extent that other Jag games were, then we'd certainly have a lot of people owning multiple copies today, if they could pick them up used for $10-20 bucks just like a copy of Doom or Iron Soldier. What needs to happen, but never will, is for the rom to be released into the public domain (apparently all profits have to go to charity anyway) so people can use skunkboards and flashroms or make their own carts.

[remowilliams]

Gunstar, on Sat Oct 1, 2011 5:51 PM, said:

(apparently all profits have to go to charity anyway)

No they do not, why do people keep on repeating this nonsense?

[Chuplayer]

omf, on Fri Sep 30, 2011 3:06 PM, said:

GeneralMurdock, on Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:05 PM, said:

I saw lots of times people saying that it uses some special chip but I think this is BS/BS. Correct me if I'm wrong, please.

93C86 eeprom

I found information that it uses 93C66.

http://www.yaronet.c...php?s=31381&p=2

[GeneralMurdock]

Chuplayer, on Sun Oct 2, 2011 8:04 AM, said:

omf, on Fri Sep 30, 2011 3:06 PM, said:

GeneralMurdock, on Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:05 PM, said:

I saw lots of times people saying that it uses some special chip but I think this is BS/BS. Correct me if I'm wrong, please.

93C86 eeprom

I found information that it uses 93C66.

http://www.yaronet.c...php?s=31381&p=2

Nice, thank you )

Now the only questions left is how it reads between both eeproms and the base start address.
I found out the reason behind Jagulator not booting this game but virtual jaguar working.

Since BSG have JUGS-DD, it's like 2 games in a single EEPROM.
When you start the Jagulator and load BSG it will ask to power up the Jaguar CD, this happens because it's trying to start the JUGS-DD.
Virtual Jaguar on the other side corrected this and BSG works (with some graphic issues).

This is more like a trial and error that a small analysis of the game dump would answer. BSG is only encrypted on the very beginning, like 2%, and that's the header of the rom.
So it's easy to track down where things are using any HEX editor.

Hope this information is useful to this thread. By the way, I'm little short on time so experimenting with BSG will take some time.

Here the wrong boot in Jagulator:

Edited by GeneralMurdock, Sun Oct 2, 2011 8:21 AM.

[omf]

Chuplayer, on Sun Oct 2, 2011 8:04 AM, said:

omf, on Fri Sep 30, 2011 3:06 PM, said:

GeneralMurdock, on Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:05 PM, said:

I saw lots of times people saying that it uses some special chip but I think this is BS/BS. Correct me if I'm wrong, please.

93C86 eeprom

I found information that it uses 93C66.

http://www.yaronet.c...php?s=31381&p=2

some other useful info?
http://mdgames.de/je2prombrowser.htm

[GeneralMurdock]

LOL.

Now it's game over for sure ))

Thanks OMF. This is really helpful!

[GeneralMurdock]

Can anyone put a light in my legal question?

The Battlesphere Gold was made based on a battlesphere.
The jaguar became open source with the condition that everything sold goes to charity.

So, can someone be sued for creating yourself a copy of BSG?
I mean, sued you can be but you would end up paying the process to a charity, right?

[rush6432]

Willard, on Mon Sep 19, 2011 6:09 PM, said:

For a 2-player network all you need is a Jaglink. If more than that, you need a catbox, scatbox, or Jaglink 2. The only networkable game that uses an alternate device is Ultra Vortek. It requires a Jaguar Voice Modem (about 200 protos were made), and allows you to connect (locally) through a telephone line.

Ive still yet to test ultra vortek over long distance but i might here shortly with jagslave and see if that short distance thing is 100 percent true.  The original jvm faq mentions mixed play between local and long distance so it gives me some hope

As for other networkable titles, NetWar (i-war beta) supposedly has modem code in it.... never seen the actual rom file myself or tested it but ive heard this from a few.

Club drive has modem code too but a quick look at the code doesnt really show a connect sequence screen (enter number or wait for call)...  it LOOKS Like it just connects to the other end (probably setup for line simulator)
Whats crazy is that its all there.... just disabled. Needs to be turned on with a few flags and compiled and tested.

EIther way though, no homebrew games make use of the jaglink yet. Zerosquare did release a demo of how to use this a while back (software uart/bit banging) but it hasnt really been put to use that i know of.

I did confirm that i was able to tunnel jaglink connections over ethernet however... Aircars seemed to be the most cooperative... doom struggled as its code is already crippled and neither is meant for latency, but with the doom source it could be implemented possibly....

Hopefully the skunk brings more possibilities as far as networking to the table in the future. Would be very cool to network some jag games over the internet,

Edited by rush6432, Mon Feb 6, 2012 2:13 PM.

[82-T/A]

I remember thinking this game was totally awesome... but looking at the videos online on YouTube... compared with what I consider to be average now, even that game is somewhat dated. The graphics don't appear to be any better than say I-War (which I LOVE!) and Missile Command in the 3D mode.

Still, awesome game... but I certainly can't afford to spend $500+ on a used one on eBay... heh...

[racerx]

82-T/A, on Mon Feb 6, 2012 6:42 PM, said:

I remember thinking this game was totally awesome... but looking at the videos online on YouTube... compared with what I consider to be average now, even that game is somewhat dated. The graphics don't appear to be any better than say I-War (which I LOVE!) and Missile Command in the 3D mode.

Graphics are good, but the big improvement is in framerate.  It's a pretty stable 30-ish fps, whereas I-War (to me, anyway) is damn near unplayable when things start blowing up onscreen.  I lot of that is to be expected, as there's a lot of open space you're flying through, but I think it's aged pretty gracefully.