Oswald
-
Content Count
676 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Oswald
-
-
no, c64 have no zx emulator :-) only zxbasic interpreter
. you cant run zx spectrum machine code only zx spectrum basic code
uh oh, well then a8 is better than the c64 because *drums* it has a horribly slow (literally unusable) ZX EMULATOR!
edit:
by the way as a8 people use 85' machines for comparison I can happily bring up the c128 with its - YES!- built in z80. imagine how good it can emulate speccy software
we dont even need to write an emulator 
-
If I thought other machines were better, they would be the ones where I did all those things. Isn't the case though. I suspect that's true for a lot of people here on AA.LOL. you know I have sold my c64 to be able to buy an a1200. now I frankly thought the amiga is better, but in a year or two I had a c64 setup again. I missed it.
-
The 800xl was light years better in construction than C64, at least they used actual steel sheilding, the c64 used tinfoil cardboard, it was laughable
I think the steel shielding is laughable when a tinfoil cardboard is enough. why would anyone want kgs of steel in a machine ?!
This is a stupid point to still be arguing: My computer's shielding is better made than your computer's shielding. I know, let's compare the rubber feet!
I agree. add case design, keyboard quality, etc.
Yeah, but at least case design and keyboard were external things that affected the user to some degree. Complaining about shielding is like lamenting the brand of resistors used.
I mentioned them because in my eyes there's no true difference.
-
only demo version of Space Harrier needs 128K RAM, current cart version needs 64K RAM. (Cart is 1MB though!)wow. and a8 people are comparing THAT to a c64 game which is 22 yrs old, and has all levels and everything in 64k....
Yep! Finally an 8-bit computer getting the real Space Harrier! Makes me sad C64 game development has ground to a halt and won't benefit...
http://noname.c64.org/csdb/release/?id=73770
-
Now let's hear no more talk of how the C64 looked as good as any Atari 8-bit.its always a8 people who bring up this stupid shit. personally I find the c64 nice, but I know I'm biased so I never bring this up. who gives a fuck anyway how does it look. what matters is what can it do.
-
At this point, still desperately needing the C64 to be better than the Atari, they start to bring up other arguments:“At least we can agree that the C64 was better looking!”
“At least we can agree that the C64 was better built!”
“At least we can agree that Commodore was a better-managed company!”
“At least we can all agree the Amiga was better, and a spiritual ancestor of the Commodore 64!”And so on….
huh? all that stupid issues are being brought up by a8 people. nobody cares about looks, and company management and shit when they know by heart their machine is better
-
Ie: The a8 graphics h/w remained unchanged over it's whole life ( baring GTIA/CTIA ) - even the c64 had a major upgrade going to the c128 ( and the c65 looked really cool )uhh the c128 is horrible when I compare to what it should been. the gfx doesnt changed they just added a 2nd video chip which could do 80 column, charmode, and ugly colors hires bitmap.
-
c64 is fine machine with much more games...but can you do that on c64?
-
emulate other machine? in this case zx spectrum...
or... bbc micro? appleII? (example:
)on atari (thanks Antic) it is rather easy.
c64 had speccy emu in the early 80s. there's even a full port of speccy's basic interpreter. for the record: c64 could emulate speccy's screen better as it can do 8 of the speccy colors pretty accurately, and the bitmap is almost the same.
the knight lore game is a PORT not an emulation. check wikipedia to see whats the difference.
-
we should leave speculations of Space Harrier XE to Sheddy, the coder... I assume that the RAM is used for preshifting all gfx and to have unrolled "set shape" routines... and of course the move tables for the level data....hey Sheddy, very very good job on this game ! is there a link where there's some in depth info's on how it all works? I would love to know everything
-
only demo version of Space Harrier needs 128K RAM, current cart version needs 64K RAM. (Cart is 1MB though!)wow. and a8 people are comparing THAT to a c64 game which is 22 yrs old, and has all levels and everything in 64k....
-
The 800xl was light years better in construction than C64, at least they used actual steel sheilding, the c64 used tinfoil cardboard, it was laughable
I think the steel shielding is laughable when a tinfoil cardboard is enough. why would anyone want kgs of steel in a machine ?!
This is a stupid point to still be arguing: My computer's shielding is better made than your computer's shielding. I know, let's compare the rubber feet!
I agree. add case design, keyboard quality, etc.
-
Now I find ST vs. Amiga comparisons amusing, because at that point Atari and Commodore had effectively traded design teams. The ST is more closely related to the C64, and the Amiga is the direct descendant of the A8.what I find amusing is how a8 fans are constantly trying to claim a piece of amiga's fame. but the amiga was C='s. without C= there would have been no amiga, just ripped off chips in an atari pc. so stop stealing, and stick to c64 vs a8.
When the people primarily responsible for one machine build another machine and say outright that it was an expansion on the concepts used in the previous machine, then I think linking the Amiga to the A8 historically is legitimate.
You say there'd be no Amiga without Commodore but the Amiga existed before Commodore got involved, and Atari was actively trying to purchase the design. Commodore made a better deal in the end but the Amiga would have come to market either way.
amiga CORP existed BUT the amiga computer did NOT existed before commodore. finalization (if not 99% of that) of the motherboard, chip layout, most of the OS was done inside commodore. atari only wanted the chips. Jack Tramiel style you know. the amiga people they'd not hire. they'd put the chips in something they designed, not the original amiga team...
-
Pac-Man on the 2600 isn't an example of anything but poor programming. Pac-Man on the Channel F is impressive for what that system can do, but Nukey's Pesco-to-PacMan hacks are much better for comparison.the 2600 will never make pac man better than fairchild chanel f. poor programming or not. I dont think sprites can be much better plexed than that.. there's the horizontal limit anyway, and there's nothing else to do that job the HW offers...
-
No, most c64s were the old brown ugly ones. Cheaply made.yeah, indeed. cheaply made. one of the keys of c64's succes. xl/xe line was basically a cost reducing design so that they can keep up with the c64's price. they were cheaply made. y'know
-
could you please tell me where in the world have i said that? and why does a 256 color machine need interlace to get more colors ?!
If someone ask me in the future what a "Oxymoron" ist, I will quote this last sentences to him.
Only one hint: The Atari does not need interlace to get more colours. The interlace is often used to have a higher colour density. But Space harrier is not using interlace anywhere. It uses "flicker" which is nothing but a palette interleaving. The game itself would look impressive enough even without it.
looks like I know better how an a8 game work than you, so please stop with how little I know about the atari
let me explain: space harrier uses 2 bitmaps to get more than 4 colors on the screen. its more than register changing. now c64 can use just ONE bitmap and still display mroe then 4 colors, that would double the speed, and the c64 port would be just as fast or faster.But Space harrier is not using interlace anywhere. It uses "flicker" which is nothing but a palette interleaving.
-
You really know nothing about the Atari, do you?Could you tell me please, where in the world the Atari needs interlace for cycling palette colours?
could you please tell me where in the world have i said that? and why does a 256 color machine need interlace to get more colors ?!
-
to those interested in how tape loading worked on the c64:
http://noname.c64.org/csdb/forums/?roomid=...;showallposts=1
-
indeed, even if the game on A8 LOOKS MORE UGLY, playability is there to help poor allas out for teh win or vice versa.which generation of the A8 are you referring to? 400/800, XL, or XE. 3 different styles there, and the Jack Tremial designed both the C64 and XE series. The 2nd generation of C64 & C128D have a lower profile and look similar to the XL/XEs. Can't believe people are just looking at the 400/800 and saying the C64 is has a better keyboard and look without mentioning the XL/XE models. Its a matter of opinion, but I prefer the later lower profile computers because there easier to type on. Never liked the older/taller profile of the Vic-20, C64, Atari 800. Oh did you know the Atari 400 and Commodore Pets were on the list of worst keyboards?
please reread very carefully what was you replying to.
-
Start to make a C64 version of Space Harrier with a real Gameplay resolution of 160x100, and see the C64 whining.Using graphics? Too slow. It would end in a "Mood" resolution of 40x50
Using multiple Sprites? This would slowdown the cpu to effective 500-600MHz. Not much for game calculations, where the Atari has around 1.5MHz left. Oops... this made my calculations wrong. The Gain would be up to 300% then
hello... you are comparing 64k machine with 320k...
so then I can use RAM expansion aswell, and REU (ram expansion unit) for the c64 has.. DMA.. and the c64 can display colors... without interlace... I am seeing a whining emkay...
or.. if I wouldnt use the DMA on the REU, then.. as I dont need interlace to add colors, I can draw the scenery twice as fast... only one bitmap to update... c64 will be faster even this way
I can also see where the C64 would have issues with game port like Space Harrier, or anything that is going have lots of moving objects on the screen. Even if you use the C64 color map & sprites, you're still limited by the 1Mhz CPU speed. Coding something like this has to be real efficient.
let me explain:
- a8 space harrier uses 320k, c64 one uses 64k (and 20 years earlier) 320k allows to precalculate many many many things.
- if I use the factory default ram expansion to equal the rams, then I will also have an extra hw, since its built in, (DMA) which copyes bytes at 1byte/cycle speed. pretty handy to draw software sprites.
- a8 version uses interlace -> it fills 2 bitmap instead of just one. c64 can add colors using just 1 bitmap = 2x faster than a8 method- > will be faster. (1.7/2 vs 1 mhz) without DMA logic.
-
In addition, I remember reading somewhere that Atari invested around $500,000 in the Amiga Corporation, so I don't think the Amiga would've made it out the door if it weren't for Atari's involvement in the Lorraine project.giving money which was paid back in less than a month (by c=) is not something I would describe as "involvement in the lorraine project" I also dont believe amiga wouldnt make it without that, c= would have eventually buy them this or that way anyhow. and the loan: it was just JT tactics to get the know how for nothing. if amiga couldnt repay it, atari would have got all the designs.
"Atari offered a $500,000 loan in exchange for the Lorraine's motherboard design. The loan would have to be paid back in one month, and if Amiga was unable to repay the loan, the entire Lorraine project would be forfeited to Atari."
-
what I find amusing is how a8 fans are constantly trying to claim a piece of amiga's fame. but the amiga was C='s. without C= there would have been no amiga, just ripped off chips in an atari pc. so stop stealing, and stick to c64 vs a8.Wrong! Amiga is really C='s, but team is the same who made Atari 800, Jay's team. Mentioned hundreds of times elsewhere.
which part did you found "wrong" ?
also please list the team behind 400/800 and a1000 for a proof.
-
atari 8 bit is a fine example of how amigaish architecture and 8 pixel sprites doesnt really works in the 8 bit world. tho for the time it was the best.Amiga is amiga
own class. thanks jay.I would not use that as the fact, because A8 P/M worked ok for many games. And of course, A8 is it's own class too.
I said "not really well". the machine is forced to do softsprites.
-
the membrane shit of the 400 didnt make it or the chicklet pet keys, but c64? wtf?!Before you get too emotional, you may want to actually read that entire article.
..Al
I have, but that was some moons ago... my mistake..
-
19 - BRISTLES
Atari screenshots
The same game in both machines. There are difference on the colors used. I'd prefer the Atari version, looks more cool, colors has been chosen from his large palette. High levels it so frustating, I hate the girl who put her hands on my recently painted walls.
C64 screenshots
wow so a8 wins because it has different colors. objectivity strikes again...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Atari v Commodore
in Atari 8-Bit Computers
Posted
haha yeah, and the public who bought a8 was ofcourse very smart. the dumb bought c64s....
sorry they were, except the 1200, the c64 is the reason for the 800xl/xe...:
"The timing was particularly bad for Atari Inc.; the 1200XL was a flop, and the earlier machines were too expensive to produce to be able to compete at the rapidly falling price points. The solution was to replace the 1200XL with a machine that users would again trust, while at the same time lowering the production costs to the point where they could compete with Commodore.
Starting with the 1200XL design as the basis for a new line, Atari Inc. engineers were able to add a number of new IC's to take over the functions of many of those remaining in the 1200XL. While the 1200XL fit onto a single board, the new designs were even smaller, simpler, and as a result much less expensive. To reduce cost even further, manufacturing of a new series of machines was set up in the far east.
Several versions of the new design, the 600XL, 800XL, 1400XL and 1450XLD were announced at the 1983 Summer CES. "