Barnacle boy

If you're so keen to play Hypersports in particular, then unless I'm mistaken a solid state card solution like the SD2IEC board for $45 should do the trick, considering Hypersports is just a single load game. Plus it apparently works with 300+ multi-load games. It's not a complete solution like the 1541 Ultimate, but perhaps it would meet your needs. Actually, that "I was THERE" bullshit came from an Atari user.

Hmm. Interesting. Kind of makes me want to try to shoehorn the innards of my xbox into a c64 breadbin case. BTW, I must admit that one of the drawbacks of emulating on xbox is that it outputs a 640x480 interlaced image, and although the rescaling is nicely done and not at all ugly, it still lacks the steady scan-liney goodness of a proper non-interlaced 200p image.

Do any of these things - the sound, the slowness, the intensity, the time warp, etc - not happen when playing under emulation? Honest question.

What's so bad about emulators? Just play both systems on a modded xbox on a big TV in your lounge room. Quick loading, savestates, re-mappable controls, and best of all, you can save the $20 dollars for beer... or is that sacrilegious?

Great. Seems you guys have triggered a wormhole in the forum's space-time continuum.

Hmm... I trust you're aware I haven't been discussing the vic20? Atari vs c64 is where the fun is at!

Well see, that's my point Allas, which I think you already realise -- the point being that if you get into comparing games across different platforms while ignoring the circumstances under which a game was produced, you're not getting the full picture. It was a response to this comment by The Doctor: "Whenever Atari coders make something good or better than what was available on the c=64 the statement is ... you can't compare what people code today vs what they coded then.... I submit you can since it is still the same hardware. It is simply being used more to it's potential. If a person can not handle that then it is their character flaw or failing." errr... sorry, I have to call bullshit on that 'not playable' comment. It's certainly challenging... perhaps this makes it 'not playable' for some unskilled players?

ahahah! Oh my god, you're talking about the VIC20 aren't you. I guess you confused me with someone else you're arguing with. You really don't read what you're replying to, do you? Or maybe your comprehension skills are weak. Here's a little heads up for you: My post with that list of games had NOTHING to do with the VIC20 argument. Here, I'll repeat my post, which was a respons to something The Doctor said. Let's see if you can follow it this time around: So I suppose if I show comparisons between games like Nebulus or Blinky's Scary School or Green Beret or Rampage etc etc, I won't hear a peep out of you. You won't pipe up trying explain the context in which these games were made (particularly as these are games made in the same period, and under commercial constraints on both sides). Yep, you'd be as quiet as a mouse, I'm sure. Note: Nothing to do with VIC20! You'd think my most recent post, in which I replied to your bizarre comment and mentioned only the Atari and the c64 would have tipped you off... and yet, apparently not! Do try to keep up.

Jesus christ dude, you sound like a freaked out Vietnam vet. Nebulus - 1988, Blinky's Scary School - 1990, Green Beret - 1986, Rampage - 1987. So which of those are 'long after the death of the system'? Nebulus? Blinky's Scary School? I guess the atari was quite dead in 1990, but the c64 was still battling on. Or were some of those other titles not actually released at the time? Also, when you say "doesn't help your case", what exactly is my 'case'? I suggest you try to view my comment in the context of the quote I was replying to. Also, have you ever considered replying to people without quoting an entire quote tree? More advice from a 'noob' for you.

So now a C64 can be used as a web server, 32-bit computer, professional synth, and composer's tool - all in 2009. Who'd have known there was no need to ever manufacture anything newer? What on Earth were they thinking when the ceased production? Why did they even contrive the C128 (or Amiga)? And all this time, I thought it was just being compared to A8. What I want to know, is how I can get a 427 side-oiler or maybe Hemi in there. Or maybe there's a Prius mod so it's eco-friendly. I think your sarcasm is misplaced. You should bear in mind that oky2000 was addressing the suggestion that the c64 doesn't have much to offer in terms of expandability. As for the c64 webserver, it might not be particularly useful, but it's kind of cute. Check it out here. (Sometimes the site gets slashdotted or swamped by Digg traffic, so the owner added a non-c64 hosted gateway).

Because your own experiences must surely be universal? You are the archetypal everyman? The funny thing is that you've already made a big thing about you being old(about 46, right?), and yet you behave like this. So I suppose if I show comparisons between games like Nebulus or Blinky's Scary School or Green Beret or Rampage etc etc, I won't hear a peep out of you. You won't pipe up trying explain the context in which these games were made (particularly as these are games made in the same period, and under commercial constraints on both sides). Yep, you'd be as quiet as a mouse, I'm sure. I guess the apples don't fall too far from the tree. Maybe they sensed that you would kick them out of home if they showed any preference for the c64.

Fair enough, but there's also the romanticism of being able to say "Gee, the machine I bought in 1984/85/whenever could have done this back then if only this program were written at the time." Which kind of has more of an allure than "...if only this program and 320k RAM were available at the time." And you must admit, it's a little underwhelming when you see something like Yie Ar Kung-Fu on Atari, looking pretty much the same as the 1985 c64 version yet requiring five times the RAM.

Feel free to post some. I don't mind being forced to see some colourful pics! Yes, that's true to a certain extent, but when you make the resolution too low, the loss of detail leads to an overly blurry looking image. I agree. The colour limitations of the atari is clearly a matter for debate, but the range offered by the palette kicks arse. I think the c64 offers a strong selection of colours given that it's restricted to only 16, but man oh man it would have been nice to be able to choose those colours from a broad palette like the Atari's. I guess it's just a different approach. One of the cool things for c64 owners during the 80s and 90s was seeing more tricks and cooler stuff get coaxed out of their machine without requiring changes to the hardware. They went from seeing those early games that often didn't use the hardware effectively (often atari or apple ports), to seeing their machine do things they didn't expect were possible. As the flow of new games continued, C64 users became accustomed to seeing newer software set higher benchmarks on the same old hardware. I think this history and the old thrill of seeing new tricks plays a large part in giving c64 owners an interest in seeing the limits pushed even further without hardware changes.

Aha. Sure. I wonder if the Atari can even display a vertical scrolling shmup as colourful as what Joe c64 owner can make in SEUCK. Space Harrier is definitely impressive, but the colour flickering is kind of offputting. The colour limitations on the Atari is one of my main reservations about it. That and the narrow sprites.

So why do you seem to get so annoyed when someone points out that to create one atari MC sprite you have to sacrifice 2 monochrome ones? Isn't that just a fact? And if you layer your 2 MC sprites + 2 MC missiles, how many colours do you end up with in your object and what is the final width of the object, assuming the resolution is kept at a standard 160?

Who's not accepting Atari sprites in MC mode? Let me ask you this: How many monochrome atari sprites can be displayed on one scanline? And how many multicolour atari sprites can be displayed on one scanline?

So in effect to create two atari MC sprites, you're sacrificing four monochrome ones. And as frohn mentioned, four sprites on the c64 would give you 6 colours too. Better yet, three of those four sprites could be hires. Even if you want to just overlay two sprites for 4 colours, you'd make the overlaid one hires. There'd be no reason to make both multicolour.

You keep using straw-man arguments and chewbacca defense (which I am showing you how not just accusing you). You directly stated colors are retained and now you are stating it can scroll. Two different things. TMR is clearly stating that on the c64 the colours are retained when scrolling in hires pixel increments (or half colour clocks as you might call them). Considering you guys have been arguing off and on about that very issue over the last several pages, it's incredibly disingenuous for you to now try to obfuscate the matter by pretending to misinterpret what he is saying as two separate unrelated points. And the irony is that you keep accusing others of "the Chewbacca Defence". If we isolate this sequence of words, a small jewel of pure shining truth emerges from your post.

What do you mean by '320 scroll mode'. Are you talking about scrolling in single (hires) pixel increments? This isn't a 'mode'. This is just how scrolling on the c64 works, regardless of whether the graphics are hires or multicolour. If you wanted to make the scrolling shift in a whole multicolour pixel step you would would literally have to increment the scrolling by two pixels per frame, as the scrolling is always conducted in hires pixel increments. And you'll find that plenty of horizontally scrolling games on the c64 move in single (hires) pixel increments, because stepping more than 1 pixel per frame at 50fps results in a scrolling speed that is too fast for many games.

Frankly, this stuff you're saying about c64 games being generally unresponsive sounds like a load of bollocks. The majority of 2d games on the c64 run at 50fps for PAL. That was one of the c64's strengths. If you're going to seriously suggest that most c64 games you've tried have some kind of inherent lag in responsiveness, you'd better start giving some examples. I just read the review here and it said no such thing. More non-factual theorising stated as fact. How do you explain those c64 games that multiplex sprites together to create large enemies without any glitching? Reading through some of these posts, it's clear that the way some of you guys perceive the c64 is actually quite different to reality. And don't forget ! Not smooth? It runs at 50fps, updating all scrolling and movement every frame. You're really playing fast and loose with the truth here. The vast majority of criticisms in the lemon64 comments are about its difficulty level, as it is indeed a challenging game. Not a single one of those comments suggests that the game doesn't move smoothly. Is it possible that you're trying to play a PAL game on an NTSC system, and so seeing some kind of framerate glitch? As for speed... Clearly the enemies move swiftly. The bullets move swiftly. The speed of the player ship is obviously a design decision. It's still responsive. Don't confuse speed with responsiveness -- they're not the same thing. With your approach, you might as well look at Raiden in the arcades and say "Ha! It can't move the player ship quickly!" Oh yes... lowering the frame rate will make a game more responsive. Oh yes indeed. And again, not a single person in those comments is claiming the game isn't smooth. Stop trying to twist the truth. One person says "the craft moves kinda slow over the screen" which has nothing to do with smoothness. If the devs wanted the ship to move faster, it wouldn't be hard, would it? They'd just have to make it jump 2px per frame instead of 1px. OMG! Technical nightmare!

Don't forget !

That's because half the time you're racing on raised sections of track, which is a feature true to the arcade original. Admittedly the way the roadside pillars are cut off at road-level leaves plenty to be desired. :/

Did you run out of contenders already?

So in other words, there's nothing really that can justify a statement like: "It does take a lot to bog down the A8 down to an equivalent speed as a Commodore 64. By that time it probably is running something that exceeds the # colors + sprites capable from theC64."

Really? Can you show me some Atari games similar to c64 games like Katakis and Armalyte? If what you're saying it true, then the Atari should have games like these that run at the same speed (50fps) and have even MORE sprites moving about! That sounds awesome! I'll be disappointed if it turns out that you're just talking up the Atari beyond its capabilities.