Hard question about Lynx

[The_Laird]

I say this because most games that highlight a console's power tend to be designed around what the hardware of the target console can do. Slime world's pulsating background for example obviously makes extensive use of the lynx's scaling capability. Just as Gunstar Heroes takes advantage of the Genesis's extremely fast CPU and ability to shove loads of sprites onscreen with BG H-ints. Just swapping over a game from another console doesn't highlight the strengths of the system you are porting to (Just imagine porting GSH to the SNES). You have to look at the quality of the BEST titles on each console and what the hardware in general can do.

 

The lynx is one of my favorite portables, I love the hardware design and flexiblity. But comparing it to the TG-16, Genesis, and SNES is absurd. It should be kept in the league of what its main competitors were, the GB and GG (which, hardware wise, it can easily trump).

- TailChao

 

I agree with most of what you said, games like STUN Runner, Battlewheels and Awsome Golf make optimum use of the Lynx's hardware and your right Gunstar Heroes would be horrible on the SNES. It wasn't me who started comparing it to the 3 16-bit consoles but I believe my examples made a good point. It slashes from a great height on the GB and Geargear and after all those were its contempories so thats what counts the most.

[AGA]

I think the Lynx hardware is quite powerful, but don't omit the screen resolution of the Atari handheld.

 

Lynx : 160 x 102 -> 16320 pixels

SNES : 256 x 224 -> 57344 pixels

Megadrive : 320 x 224 -> 71680

 

When Edge stated "the Lynx is an imensely powerful machine that certainly

matches if not suppases the SNES in many areas" they forgot to mention that

the Lynx has almost 4 times less pixels to process.

And it's even more in the case of the Genesis/Megadrive.

 

That reminds me a post from a Lynx diehard I read some time ago that stated that

the Lynx Blitter was even more powerful than the Neo Geo GPU !

 

I was very impressed by Alpine Games, it's the game that made me buy a Lynx, but

let's be reasonable, as powerful as the Lynx can be, its harware would not be able to manage

4 times more pixels as easily and this would inevitably result in a fall of performances.

I don't think it could blow any of the 3 16bit home consoles (PC Engine, Megadrive and SNES...).

[The_Laird]

I think the Lynx hardware is quite powerful, but don't omit the screen resolution of the Atari handheld.

 

Lynx : 160 x 102 -> 16320 pixels

SNES : 256 x 224 -> 57344 pixels

Megadrive : 320 x 224 -> 71680

 

When Edge stated  "the Lynx is an imensely powerful machine that certainly

matches if not suppases the SNES in many areas" they forgot to mention that

the Lynx has almost  4 times less pixels to process.

And it's even more in the case of the Genesis/Megadrive.

 

That reminds me a post from a Lynx diehard I read some time ago that stated that

the Lynx Blitter was even more powerful than the Neo Geo GPU !

 

I was very impressed by Alpine Games, it's the game that made me buy a Lynx, but

let's be reasonable, as powerful as the Lynx can be, its harware would not be able to manage

4 times more pixels as easily and this would inevitably result in a fall of performances.

I don't think it could blow any of the 3 16bit home consoles (PC Engine, Megadrive and SNES...).

981136[/snapback]

 

Thats a very stupid statement seen as the the Lynx is a Handheld and plays on a very small screen so couldn't have many more pixels. The SNES and Megadrive play on TV sets that are at leaset 10 times the size of a Lynx LCD screen!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Anyone comparing a Neo Geo GPU to the Lynx's is stupid too though . . . .

[Jess Ragan]

The big draw to the Super NES lies in its high resolution, outstanding sound output, and gorgeous 256 color visuals. Sure, the Lynx has a speedy processor and the ability to scale and rotate characters, but when it's saddled with the same resolution as the Atari 2600, has terrible sound, and a sixteen color palette, you're going to notice a huuuuuuge difference in the quality of the audiovisuals.

 

Anyone who tells you that the Lynx is comparable to the Super NES is setting you up for a fall. There's a vast difference between the two systems where graphics and sound are concerned, even with the scaling and rotation on the Lynx. There are exceptions like Blue Lightning, but for the most part, Lynx games look 8-bit thanks to the limited resolution and color palette. The fact that many Lynx games were created by small Western design teams with shoestring budgets doesn't help matters much.

 

JR

[The_Laird]

The big draw to the Super NES lies in its high resolution, outstanding sound output, and gorgeous 256 color visuals.  Sure, the Lynx has a speedy processor and the ability to scale and rotate characters, but when it's saddled with the same resolution as the Atari 2600, has terrible sound, and a sixteen color palette, you're going to notice a huuuuuuge difference in the quality of the audiovisuals.

 

Anyone who tells you that the Lynx is comparable to the Super NES is setting you up for a fall.  There's a vast difference between the two systems where graphics and sound are concerned, even with the scaling and rotation on the Lynx.  There are exceptions like Blue Lightning, but for the most part, Lynx games look 8-bit thanks to the limited resolution and color palette.  The fact that many Lynx games were created by small Western design teams with shoestring budgets doesn't help matters much.

 

JR

981478[/snapback]

 

Don't agree at all with most of your post. First of all I have already explained the incredible stupidity of comparing the resolution (and for that matter on screen colours) yet you still did it again????? If a 2600 was played on a Lynx screen it wouldn't look so blocky would it? There are loads of Lynx games that look better than Blue Lightning, that was a first generation Epyx title. Very few Lynx games look 8-bit if any, remember the Lynx does have a 16-bit graphics chip. Shoestring budgets or not the Lynx has the highest quality games collection of any of the Atari consoles.

[Jess Ragan]

Very few Lynx games look 8-bit if any, remember the Lynx does have a 16-bit graphics chip. Shoestring budgets or not the Lynx has the highest quality games collection of any of the Atari consoles.

 

When you consider systems like the 7800 and Jaguar, that's really not saying much.

 

JR

[JagFan422]

mr kizaa you are dumb.

 

If you hooked up a SNES to a portable TV you'd get the same quality as if you hooked it up to a 60" tv. TV size has nothing to do with resolution. if you had a 200" tv the resolution is still the same. Your fanboy logic is astounding.

 

GameGear and Gameboy had tons more games than the Lynx, it had better 3rd party developers and being Nintendo and Sega, 1st party support. Find me a game on the Lynx, from the era of when the Lynx was not a dead system, that looks as good or better than Super Mario Land 2, Metroid II, Battle Unit Zeoth, Sonic Drift or Sonic Chaos (gamegear). Very few look 8-bit?? So what are they 6-bit? Very few look better than Gameboy or Gamegear games.

 

I don't contest the Lynx's power, but when it comes down to who had the prettiest games, it still came in third, its graphics are not good for what its supposed to do. And i'll say again, to say the Lynx was as good as a SNES is completely absurd. Again, it could never do or come close to doing and looking like 3/4 of the SNES library of games.

 

There's only a few games, now here is gauntlet for the NES

And now Roadblasters for NES and finally a side scroller for NES.

 

 

Gee, if i was to guess, i'd say the Lynx could barely pump out graphics better than the NES let alone the SNES.

 

Also, what is so fantastic about Stun Runner that the SNES or Megadrive could not do? Then ask yourself if the Lynx could do anything the SNES could do with the FX chip. Nope. And its people like you that give me the reason to come here. its funny, every system and game company has its fan boys, and as soon as someone says something bad about the system, its funny to see how huffy and puffy and defensive the fan boys get.

Edited December 14, 2005 by JagFan422

[Lamer Deluxe tm]

Barely better than the NES?

 

Let me see the NES do something similar to: STUN Runner, Blue Lightning, Shadow of the Beast, Steel Talons, Hard Drivin', Battlezone 2000, Electrocop, Warbirds etc.

 

And I'd really like to see the SNES or GBA do STUN Runner or Blue Lightning.

 

A major part of the look of a game is art direction. You can get really good looking graphics on a limited system with good art direction and talented artists. Look at games like Shadow of the Beast and Metroid for instance. Or the Kirby screenshot you posted.

 

TailChao mentioned that the Lynx can do much more than what most of the commercial releases show. Many of them are underutilizing the capabilities of the Lynx.

 

And a smaller display means that a low resolution is less apparent. People are noticing this now with the Gameboy Micro. My PSOne games also look a lot better on a small 5" TFT display.

 

Don't forget viewing distance though, you usually don't sit as close to a TV screen as you are to the display of a handheld. Only that way the size of the display doesn't make a lot of difference.

[The_Laird]

Gee, if i was to guess, i'd say the Lynx could barely pump out graphics better than the NES let alone the SNES.

 

Also, what is so fantastic about Stun Runner that the SNES or Megadrive could not do? Then ask yourself if the Lynx could do anything the SNES could do with the FX chip. Nope. And its people like you that give me the reason to come here. its funny, every system and game company has its fan boys, and as soon as someone says something bad about the system, its funny to see how huffy and puffy and defensive the fan boys get.

 

Its idiots like you that ruin this forum. If the Lynx had an FX then probaly, who knows? The STUN Runner question: The Genesis can not do hardware scaling so therefore could not reproduce the game as smooth or as fast as the Lynx version. The SNES has no sprite scaling or the processor speed to be able to do STUN Runner justice. The SNES has a conversion of Road Riot 4WD and Pit-Fighter which both used the same graphics chips in their arcade form and are laughable. Jerky, slow and unplayable, however the Lynx versions are nigh on arcade perfect. I'm not going into the comparisions between same games accross the systems again but what I will say is. All of those Lynx screens look better than the NES ones and that without seeing them move which is the real killer. The NES would check into flicker central, while the Lynx could keep churning out sprites and the speed and scaling would make them faster and smoother. Also many later NES games had special chips on the cartridge boards where as the Lynx never needed to, not even Alpine Games which slashes from a great height on most 16-bit console games in terms of looks alone. Saying the Gamegear and Gameboy are better is one of the most ridiculous and insanely stupisd statements i have ever read I have yet to see a GG or Gameboy game that looks better than a Lynx one. Your name is a disgrace "Jagfan"??? I can think of a better one but its unprintable. Its people like you who give the Americans the bad name they have in this country.

[doctorclu]

i agree that it was more than 8-bit, its games and what the system could do did exceed gameboy, gamegear games, and for the most part NES, but they did not exceed Genesis, SNES, hell even TG-16 games looked much better.  So to say it is 16-bit in grahics is false.  Just like saying the Jaguar is 64-bit in graphics, we all know thats not the case or it'd have games that looked better than SNES graphics and were on par with playstation/saturn/n64.

978624[/snapback]

 

I liked this quote best of all, in this case and I just knew the Jaguar was going to be brought up.

 

In the "bit classifications" it seems that you have a wide range.

 

An 8-bit system? Are we talking a TRS-80, Atari 2600, Apple II. Sound and graphics capibilities vary obviously.

 

There is a mention of the Lynx not having 16 bit graphics. One thing that I learned that I believe is a part of this is display. Take a picture with some cell phones. Looks crappy on the small screen. Port those pictures to a computer and it's monitor... much better.

I think if the Lynx had a better display to work with, there would be a marked improvement. But programmers work with what is available.

 

Truthfully, out of all the platforms, Atari was the stupidiest in leaning so much on what processor and how many bits the system is. In the case of the Jaguar despite the well deserved ridicule of "64 bit... do the math!!" the Jaguar simply was the system Atari had ready (ahead of the Panther that was being developed) so it was meant to be out there. Hard to develop for, so few games, but what games that did come out were praised pretty well. (Especially Alien vs. Predator, Tempest 2000, and Doom... many people who have only BRUSHED with the Jaguar remember those especially.)

 

64 bit graphics? As I've said before, if Playstation is a indication, then some games (like Rayman) hit the lower capibilities of a 64 bit system.

 

What the Lynx and Jaguar are, numbers aside, are game systems I have had a lot of fun with. Period.

 

Give a kid a toy, and it plays with the box for days, what does it matter what the toy was, or did. Something about that gift inspired tons and tons of joy and fun. And is therefore a success.

[TailChao]

This topic has grown into an illogical mess.

 

YES THE LYNX IS 16-BIT

 

NO, IT IS NOT MORE POWERFUL THAN GENESIS, TG-16 or SNES

 

There are many more faults in the lynx hardware than most of you seem to see, the sound system is pitiful "But we can play MODs! This is good sound!" Yes, but your CPU usage will fly off the charts and you game will run at the usual 10FPS that most games in the lynx library are stuck with. You have to extensively balance the 65C02/Suzy load to make sure the bus isn't clogged with a huge amount of suzy reads for graphic blitting and keep your code tight. The lynx is wonderful hardware, but you have to work to make it function optimally, and even then it shall NOT outperform the 16-bit consoles that have been listed repeatedly throughout this topic. I do extensive work with the GB, NES, TG-16 and Genesis amost daily, and I can assure you, they ALL have some advantages over the lynx, even the GB. In the case of the 16-bit consoles, those advanges completely nullify the stupidly reused "SCALING SCALING OMG SCALING" defense thrust upon the lynx.

 

The lynx is not the beutiful hardware you make it out to be, had it been so it would have been not just outrageously more expensive than it was, but the games wouldn't have run on the hardware as they do. Even Alpine Games, which you constantly toss around as the lynx's defense as superior hardware had a crappy frame rate and no in game music (except in the figure skating event) due to limited execution time.

 

 

It is obvious that no one who is so devoted to the false superiority of the lynx hardware as some of the people in this topic would break down and believe these facts. However, I will say it again. The lynx is NOT and NEVER will be as powerful as a Genesis, SNES, TG-16 and ESPECIALLY GBA.

Edited December 14, 2005 by TailChao

[Jess Ragan]

Yes, THANK YOU! Take it from someone who knows... TailChao has actually spent time with the Lynx hardware. He knows its shortcomings, because he's had to work around them while designing Zaku.

 

JR

[The_Laird]

It is obvious that no one who is so devoted to the false superiority of the lynx hardware as some of the people in this topic would break down and believe these facts. However, I will say it again. The lynx is NOT and NEVER will be as powerful as a Genesis, SNES, TG-16 and ESPECIALLY GBA.

 

 

So what? Its a Handheld as i've already stated. The GBA came years later so not comparing it against that. It is still more powerful than the NES, Gamegear and Gameboy. Don't think anyone sane will deny that, and that my friends is the crux of my argument. I merely wanted to point out that it can compare to the 3 16-bit consoles, I never claimed it was better. I know alot about hardware and a fair bit about programming, I had games published for the Sinclair Spectrum and the Atari ST and would maybe one day like to get back into it but can't suffer all the bullshit from the people who know nothing.

[JagFan422]

your comparisons are wrong though. Yes it compares on paper. But when it comes to the games, regardless of all 3 systems having many more games, they all out preform, they all have much better graphics. Your saying the Lynx could out preform, maybe? who knows, but everybody knows, the Lynx could not do any true 16-bit graphic game, so to compare it performance wise with the 16-bit systems is wrong to do. Compare it with the other portables of the time, not the home consoles.

 

As for the American comment, i'm not going to say anything, i've made quite a few english friends from my other forum i am a regular at, none of which are commy basturds that insult people for having an opinion. I insulted you because you were wrong, Resolution has NOTHING to do with size of the TV, you were wrong and i guess you admitted it since you did not argue the fact back, but my OPINION will always be the LYNX is not as good as any 16-bit system. even the tg-16 which was truely 8-bit is way better than the lynx and that is FACT>

[The_Laird]

Resolution has NOTHING to do with size of the TV, you were wrong and i guess you admitted it since you did not argue the fact back, but my OPINION will always be the LYNX is not as good as any 16-bit system. even the tg-16 which was truely 8-bit is way better than the lynx and that is FACT>

 

I didn't need to argue it back because DoctorClu did it for me. How can you say that games don't look different on different TV sizes? Have you ever played a Lynx on a 24 inch TV using the Blackbox? I have and it looks very blocky, much like a 2600 game. Ever played a 2600 handheld? I have and the games don't look blocky at all. Funny that. Have you ever played Master System games on a Gamegear? I have and some games are so hard to see because of the screen size and on games like Afterburner the bullets become invisible. Likewise when you play on the PC-GT. Resolution does make a difference on screen sizes and anyone with half a brain can understand that. I'm surprised you have any English friends because we don't suffer fools gladly. You should see some of our comedy shows . . . . .

 

And no, the PC Engine, as nice as a machine as it is is not way better than the Lynx I used to have one and loved it, alot, but not as much as the Lynx.

Edited December 15, 2005 by mr.kizza

[Duranik]

The lynx is not the beutiful hardware you make it out to be, had it been so it would have been not just outrageously more expensive than it was, but the games wouldn't have run on the hardware as they do. Even Alpine Games, which you constantly toss around as the lynx's defense as superior hardware had a crappy frame rate and no in game music (except in the figure skating event) due to limited execution time.

 

 

It is obvious that no one who is so devoted to the false superiority of the lynx hardware as some of the people in this topic would break down and believe these facts. However, I will say it again. The lynx is NOT and NEVER will be as powerful as a Genesis, SNES, TG-16 and ESPECIALLY GBA.

982730[/snapback]

 

 

What you are saying is totally wrong.

Almost every event in Alpine Games has transparency effects, which

requires a constant Framerate and redrawing with 60 or 75 Frames per

second otherwise you would see a strong flickering.

 

The Figure Skating for example has transparency effects and plays a 4 Channel MOD

and is loading and decrunching data in realtime during the game.

The main problem with not having music during the events is the lack of main

memory and the lynx not beeing able to nicely access data from the cartridge

(like all the other consoles do). Playing chipsound music would be no problem

at all, but the lack of time and a good editor to create chipmusic was a problem.

Therefore we wrote a Modplayer which is a well known format for music creators.

 

We never claimed AG is the pinnacle of all Lynx Games, and to stop this discussion

the lynx is a very nice machine, but of course it is no SNES or Megadrive, compare

it to GameGear and GB/GBC, thats what it was made for.

 

Johannes / Duranik

Edited December 15, 2005 by Duranik

[The_Laird]

The lynx is not the beutiful hardware you make it out to be, had it been so it would have been not just outrageously more expensive than it was, but the games wouldn't have run on the hardware as they do. Even Alpine Games, which you constantly toss around as the lynx's defense as superior hardware had a crappy frame rate and no in game music (except in the figure skating event) due to limited execution time.

 

 

It is obvious that no one who is so devoted to the false superiority of the lynx hardware as some of the people in this topic would break down and believe these facts. However, I will say it again. The lynx is NOT and NEVER will be as powerful as a Genesis, SNES, TG-16 and ESPECIALLY GBA.

982730[/snapback]

 

 

What you are saying is totally wrong.

Almost every event in Alpine Games has transparency effects, which

requires a constant Framerate and redrawing with 60 or 75 Frames per

second otherwise you would see a strong flickering.

 

The Figure Skating for example has transparency effects and plays a 4 Channel MOD

and is loading and decrunching data in realtime during the game.

The main problem with not having music during the events is the lack of main

memory and the lynx not beeing able to nicely access data from the cartridge

(like all the other consoles do). Playing chipsound music would be no problem

at all, but the lack of time and a good editor to create chipmusic was a problem.

Therefore we wrote a Modplayer which is a well known format for music creators.

 

We never claimed AG is the pinnacle of all Lynx Games, and to stop this discussion

the lynx is a very nice machine, but of course it is no SNES or Megadrive, compare

it to GameGear and GB/GBC, thats what it was made for.

 

Johannes / Duranik

983338[/snapback]

[TailChao]

Kizza, this does not help much in your defense =P

 

Duranik, I was speaking of how fast the game updates itself, not of how fast the lynx is polling the LCD. Some of the events seemed to take longer than one frame to finish their calculations from what i have seen. Usually I consider the "framerate" to be how fast the objects onscreen are updated (I do not include the hicolor/transpaencies under this category, as this can run seperately from the game code).

The MOD issue was a misunderstanding on my part, although it does take up significant CPU usage.

I aploigise for making you think that I accused you of highly proting you game, this comment was directed at kizza, who had brought up its ability to "slashes from a great height on most 16-bit console games in terms of looks alone." You made a wonderful game, I'm sorry that I offended you.

 

Its obvious that all of us are either too ignorant or too stupid to stop beating each other up over this topic which keeps being brought back from the dead for no good reason, and before we can answer that, let us conclude this discussion at this note:

We enjoy the lynx, that's what matters.

Edited December 15, 2005 by TailChao

[sage]

Duranik, I was speaking of how fast the game updates itself, not of how fast the lynx is polling the LCD. Some of the events seemed to take longer than one frame to finish their calculations from what i have seen. Usually I consider the "framerate" to be how fast the objects onscreen are updated (I do not include the hicolor/transpaencies under this category, as this can run seperately from the game code).

 

If you scroll with 60 / 75 Hz you will see only smearing, nothing more.

I wouldnt go beyond 30Hz with that f%§$ing display

[JagFan422]

and i thought Nintendo had the worst fanboy community. I can clearly see i was wrong.

 

And Mr. dumb ass, Take a Turbo Express and a Lynx, now since the Turbo express uses the same cards as the TG-16, then the tv to screen arguement will be thrown out the window and show me a game on the Turbo express that looks worse than a Lynx game. It would be pretty hard to find one because the TG-16 was superior to the Lynx in the graphics dept.

 

How you can still argue the Lynx graphically was superior to any of the system in question is beyond me, i can show you screen shot after screen shot of not only 1st party games, but many many 3rd party, and even games that were never big that still blew lynx games away..portable or console. Shit, the Gamegear and Gameboy had better looking games, you CAN"T argue that either, but if you want to try, i will get some screen shots of some games and you show me games that the lynx has that looks better. Ok?

 

I mean use your brain for a second, the GBA is only a bit better than the SNES graphically though its far superior on paper. So if the Lynx was as capable as the megadrive and Snes it would not have lasted only a couple years and died and would still be around today in the mainstream since according to you, would have no problem competing with the GBA ha ha ha ha

Edited December 20, 2005 by JagFan422

[SwedenLynxer]

and i thought Nintendo had the worst fanboy community.  I can clearly see i was wrong.

 

And Mr. dumb ass,  Take a Turbo Express and a Lynx, now since the Turbo express uses the same cards as the TG-16, then the tv to screen arguement will be thrown out the window and show me a game on the Turbo express that looks worse than a Lynx game. It would be pretty hard to find one because the TG-16 was superior to the Lynx in the graphics dept. 

 

How you can still argue the Lynx graphically was superior to any of the system in question is beyond me, i can show you screen shot after screen shot of not only 1st party games, but many many 3rd party, and even games that were never big that still blew lynx games away..portable or console.  Shit, the Gamegear and Gameboy had better looking games, you CAN"T argue that either, but if you want to try, i will get some screen shots of some games and you show me games that the lynx has that looks better.  Ok?

 

I mean use your brain for a second, the GBA is only a bit better than the SNES graphically though its far superior on paper.  So if the Lynx was as capable as the megadrive and Snes it would not have lasted only a couple years and died and would still be around today in the mainstream since according to you, would have no problem competing with the GBA ha ha ha ha

985930[/snapback]

 

Take a deep breath and relax. Count to ten. Smile. Christmas is on it's way! Lets get a peacefull world into our hearts!

 

Merry Christmas to all of you!

[Gregory DG]

the Gamegear and Gameboy had better looking games,

985930[/snapback]

The original Gameboy had better looking games?

[The_Laird]

and i thought Nintendo had the worst fanboy community.  I can clearly see i was wrong.

 

And Mr. dumb ass,  Take a Turbo Express and a Lynx, now since the Turbo express uses the same cards as the TG-16, then the tv to screen arguement will be thrown out the window and show me a game on the Turbo express that looks worse than a Lynx game. It would be pretty hard to find one because the TG-16 was superior to the Lynx in the graphics dept. 

 

How you can still argue the Lynx graphically was superior to any of the system in question is beyond me, i can show you screen shot after screen shot of not only 1st party games, but many many 3rd party, and even games that were never big that still blew lynx games away..portable or console.  Shit, the Gamegear and Gameboy had better looking games, you CAN"T argue that either, but if you want to try, i will get some screen shots of some games and you show me games that the lynx has that looks better.  Ok?

 

I mean use your brain for a second, the GBA is only a bit better than the SNES graphically though its far superior on paper.  So if the Lynx was as capable as the megadrive and Snes it would not have lasted only a couple years and died and would still be around today in the mainstream since according to you, would have no problem competing with the GBA ha ha ha ha

985930[/snapback]

You clearly are the thickest person ever to grace this forum and that is saying something. If your tiny little brain cannot understand what has been said here then I suggest you don't come back. Even Lynx programmers have backed up what I said. JAGTWAT422 more like. Oh and yes I can argue that, its easy to argue facts! But I just can't be bothered to try and explain simple things to simple minds anymore.

[TailChao]

Good GOD people, ENOUGH!

Let this topic fall.

 

No one is convincing anybody that the lynx was better than anything, we're just screaming. Like SwedenLynxer said, It's CHRISTMAS! Relax.

 

(By the by sage, a bright palette usually helps with the blurring problems, look at some GG games that used this technique, it works incredibly well on the lynx aswell.)

Edited December 20, 2005 by TailChao

[The_Laird]

Good GOD people, ENOUGH!

Let this topic fall.

 

No one is convincing anybody that the lynx was better than anything, we're just screaming. Like SwedenLynxer said, It's CHRISTMAS! Relax.

 

(By the by sage, a bright palette usually helps with the blurring problems, look at some GG games that used this technique, it works incredibly well on the lynx aswell.)

986126[/snapback]

 

I quite agree!

 

Only I don't celebrate christmas . . . .