2600 in 2006

That looks superb, though unfortunately I don't have a CC2 to test it out. I can think of a whole load of games that could be written using this kernel. The nearest thing on the 2600 is probably the Homestar RPG demo, which uses a similar trick to get 10 sprites on screen but uses the PF to provide colour. Have you played the Repton games? They are similar to a certain game containing boulders, but have much more of a puzzle element to them - definitely worth playing if you are writing a game in this genre. I'm looking forward to seeing how this turns out.

 

Chris

4A50-equipped Z26

When can we get this?

Why is it, that I can only see the comments, but not the entry?

 

EDIT: After posting the reply, the entry showed up. Weird!

I like it, but that's a lot of black space on the screen. Half the width of the screen is black and a quarter of the height.

 

I'm assuming you'll eventually add score, status, etc. to the top or bottom, but still, that's only 3/8 of the screen that's used for the display.

 

OTOH, that is more than the Homestar Runner RPG uses (though w/o its borders), so what do I know.

The net effect is quite unlike anything else on the 2600.

 

Hm... isn't that like saying the "Pitfall 2" music doesn't sound like anything else on the 2600?

Hm... isn't that like saying the "Pitfall 2" music doesn't sound like anything else on the 2600?

 

So is Activision derided for "cheating" and building extra hardware, or are they commended for figuring out how to take maximum advantage of what the 2600 provides?

 

The CPLD in the 4A50 is considerably less-complicated than the music/fetcher chip used in Pitfall II or even than the RAM controller in the SuperCharger. The cartridge has a lot more RAM and code storage than would have been affordable in 1984, but the glue logic that holds it all together is nothing that would have been impossible in the 1980's. Probably a bit more stuff than would have been practical without custom silicon, but the address generation could probably have been done with four 4-bit latches with tri-state outputs (probably one chip each), two quad 2-input multiplexors (one chip each), and a few logic gates to tie them together. The clock regeneration circuit would have been a little tricky, but certainly not impossible.

So is Activision derided for "cheating" and building extra hardware, or are they commended for figuring out how to take maximum advantage of what the 2600 provides?

 

My point was more like that I'm not surprised at all that extra hardware will make things possible one hasn't seen before

 

But yes, of course it's cheating

The nearest thing on the 2600 is probably the Homestar RPG demo, which uses a similar trick to get 10 sprites on screen but uses the PF to provide colour.

 

Homestar Runner is impressive for a demo which doesn't use any extra RAM. I don't know how much RAM is available for the actual game, though.

 

Comparing my demo to Homestar RPG, the most noticceable difference is that I make the sprites transparent for the "foreground" and solid for the "background". The missiles are used to black out the unused columns on each scan line. Beyond that, the primary differences are (1) the RR kenrel uses VBLANK to obscure the edges of the playfield, rather than COLUPF; (2) the RR kernel avoids blank scan lines between character rows. Were it not for the latter point, it would be possible to simplify the RR kernel considerably, perhaps even getting down to the no-extra-RAM point. But having the kernel be "solid" without the gaps is nice.

I like it, but that's a lot of black space on the screen.  Half the width of the screen is black and a quarter of the height... OTOH, that is more than the Homestar Runner RPG uses (though w/o its borders), so what do I know.

 

This game and Homestar Runner both use half the screen width; this is a limitation resulting from a lack of time to update the playfield (both games use the repeating non-reflected playfield but conceal half its width). If I wanted to blank the first line of each character row, I could probably push the width up to 11 or maybe even 12, but it'd be tricky. As for height, Homestar Runner does 10 rows to my eight. I just thought a rectangular area looked better than a square one, though that's a matter of taste; Homestar Runner does a nice looking job with its border though my demo can't (it needs the missiles for other things).

But yes, of course it's cheating

Of course it's been brought up before that bankswitching is arguably cheating too. Good cheating, not bad cheating.

 

I look forward to watching the development of this game, John.