Such an amazing game and incredible conversion.
Stunt Car Racer does not load quickly enough? Is that the issue?
I really appreciate the best laps/high scores and game progress saves that are allowed and retained by making this an .atr based game/release.
Unless a custom cart were to be used, this wouldn't be possible with other non-writeable formats. (Correct?)
Not sure what all reasons the creators had for going with .atr file for their game but that seems unimportant; anyway it's a moot point, the question and issue of doing things another way are academic now. We have a wonderful and completely unique A8 racing game thanks to Fandal and Irgendwer and xxl.
And what about the super sweet loading screen for this disk based game?!? We are entertained as SCR loads.
I do not understand any of the complaints in this post...Stunt Car Racer is not true 3D...besides a VBXE demo, if even that, how can A8 possibly do true 3D?
Did people kvetch about true 3D graphics with Koronis Rift, Rescue at Fractalus or The Eidolon when those landmark A8 games were released? (I don't know maybe they did but you get my point, hopefully) I would like to see an example of "true 3D" in any existing A8 game, during gameplay. As this cannot be achieved on 16 bit hardware, I cannot see how it ever would/will on standard 8 bit hardware.
True 3D, depending on how that is defined and the hardware and software used to generate effects of "true 3D," can still be challenging to achieve with any computer/video game system; with rise of more sophisticated texture mapping in the later 80's and early 90's and other software techniques, as well as 3D specialized graphics processors/co-processors and chipset developments during this time period, true 3D has come a long way (since the days of 8 and 16 bit processors mostly "working unassisted" as it were). Not sure about you all but to my eyes and brain some current PS4 and Xbox One true 3D titles still look odd at moments/times.
It's quite literally a question of perspective. True 3D -- not a wikipedia or other definition but just common, generally understood use of the term -- whether in film or on a computer/tv screen is really and always has been a question of the "eyes of the beholder." There's the illusion of 3D created on a 2D plane (a little different with IMAX or curved screens but essential factors remain the same) done to varying degrees of success.
Also, Heisenberg's principle of uncertainty dictates that subjective experiences -- particularly in this case with the way the physics of light operate and how our human/animal eyes perceive that light and help translate perceived sensory perception into coherent images and fully developed perceptions or images in our brains -- will always be unique for all individuals. For a few different reasons, everyone perceives 3D, "real," visualized third dimension visual experiences or 3D reproductions/facsimiles, a little differently.
Not sure if any of this makes sense but loading time and real/true 3D complaints seem to miss the point entirely: the greatness of what was done, not what others deem should have been done to make it better for them, their eyes and (sense of) perception.
"Chew, if only you could see what I've seen with your eyes..." Roy Batty in Blade Runner