Jump to content
Have You Played Atari Today?
2600|5200|7800|Lynx|Jaguar|Forums|Store  

sirlynxalot

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    841

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by sirlynxalot

  7. Posted · Edited by sirlynxalot

    Hello, I'm interested in either or both of these atari lynx console box variations. I already have lynxes out of the box in great shape that I got used and I really like the look of these boxes in particular to pair them with.

    ClrqGfNWEAAXk9t.jpg

    atari_lynx_box.JPG

  13. Posted · Edited by sirlynxalot

    It is shaped like a lynx!

    s-l1600.jpg



    In the bottom corner you can cleary see that lynx is fun for the entire family! - of course this setup would have cost the family between $700 and $800 dollars in 1990 dollars!

    s-l1600.jpg


    Here you can see the new blockbuster lynx software that will be out soon, such as Vindicators... I never would have expected Zarlor Mercenary to be marketed as a "3D" game, but I know what they mean ;)

    s-l1600.jpg


    Source:
    http://www.ebay.com/itm/1990-Atari-Lynx-Sales-Brochure-Player-and-Games-Mint/132084068608?_trksid=p2047675.c100005.m1851&_trkparms=aid%3D222007%26algo%3DSIC.MBE%26ao%3D2%26asc%3D41375%26meid%3D2721e3786b2b47faab0d025aa7ee12e6%26pid%3D100005%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D3%26sd%3D391678734380

  15. Posted · Edited by sirlynxalot

    Yeah I like watching the demos too, and seeing ideas implemented about how to effectively utilize the hardware. It would be nice to have a deluxe 3D professional game, but that takes lots and lots of work (to say nothing of programming, creating tons and tons of artwork takes forever), especially if only one person is working on it in their limited freetime as a hobby. All we should expect of anyone is that they pursue what they are passionate about and interested in, and its fine by me if Vlad is primarily interested in testing the hardware capabilities via short demos and sharing the results as videos, I don't regard that as a tease since taking the demos to full game status would take years and hundreds of hours of work - quite a much bigger step and investment of time and energy.

    • Like 2

  16. Posted

    I love the 32x. I got one along with my first genesis about two years ago and enjoy it from the standpoint of what this thing was doing in the mid 90s. Some people criticize the library for only being enhanced genesis ports, but there's a bunch of next level feeling games on the machine, aka, everything with polygons. I love my Jaguar for its quirkiness and I find the 32x somewhat comparable. There's only about 6-8 games I really enjoy playing for either system, but that's enough for me to decide it's a decent enough experience and fun to play. (it actually sees more use than my Jaguar and that doesn't come from a history of owning a genesis or being a genesis kid back in the day)

  20. Posted · Edited by sirlynxalot

    I've played CnB extensively. Here's my 2 cents

     

    So, it's interesting to hear that C&B's engine feels limited, from a gamer standpoint.


    This was one of the first home console polygon racing games, and perhaps the first that the CnB dev's worked on. Despite the 3D environment, the actual gameplay is pretty much identical to the 2d scanline racing games such as Outrun (or Road Rash) - you can move forward and left and right, but it feels more like you are strafing left and right as in Outrun as opposed to turning and feeling like you are actually changing where the front of the car is pointing, as in a game like NFS. Your pre-rendered car always points forward, again, like Outrun. Naturally this gameplay also lent itself to the relatively fixed camera/fixed view area, which allowed the dev's to determine what geometry should be rendered for anyone's drive down the track, and have that data on the disc to be read to ease the computational load.

     

    Do you happen to remember the framerate of C&B ? Was it locked, or did it jump up/down during gameplay, depending on where you were in the track ? This is almost impossible to guess from YT video, so I'm curious how they handled that.


    I would say it almost always felt to me as if it was a steady 20 or so FPS on the real hardware and it did not vary regardless of whether you were in a tunnel and had limited geometry on screen or looking down a hill and having tons of geometry in view. There was one exception to this, where I noticed a particular point on a particular track caused the game to start stuttering and get choppy, and that same spot on the same track regularly caused that issue, but this was like 1 out of 35 tracks in the game and in this day and age, it could perhaps also have been a fingerprint on my CnB disc interfering with reading the spooled data or my 25 year old 3DO laser failing ;)

    • Like 1

  23. Posted

    Relevant quote from the CnB thread:

     

    The entire track is still in memory. The track consists of tons-o-polygons.

    Far too many for any machine to display in real-time. On part of displaying
    something in 3D is figuring out which parts you can see and which parts you
    can't. For example, if you are driving down a race track and you are
    looking forward you can't see behind you therefore you don't want to draw
    the stuff behind you on the screen. So, you do some math to tell you what
    parts of your 3D world you can actually see. This takes alot of time. In
    fact it is probably this single biggest problem with anything that works in
    3D. All programs deal with this in different ways. Flight Simulator does
    it while it's running. It keeps a list of all the things you can see and as
    you fly around it adds or removes things. To see it in action, fly in skew
    mode and skew really fast and then stop. You will see different 3D parts
    pop in one at a time as the program finds new things that are now in your
    view.

    On CnB we wrote a program that would 'drive' down the track and for each
    section of the track it makes a list of all the parts that can actually be
    seen. These 'lists of visible parts' are then stored in the CD and as you
    drive down the track the 'list' for the part of the track you are currently
    on is loaded. This makes it run faster because we don't have to do all the
    calculations for which things are visible while you are racing.

  24. Posted

    Not to get OT, but here is how Crash N Burn was done: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.games.video.advocacy/Jojzp1BxduQ

    Thank you! Not only was this a very entertaining read to get a sense of the 3DO - Jaguar rivalry from the early adopters in that 1994 thread, but it satisfies the ultimate question many people have, about whether Crash n Burn was rendering polygons or was a pre-rendered FMV like Megarace. I've always been in the "rendering polygons" camp because you can shift the camera slightly and see different angles of the scenery, but that's not sufficient proof for some folks. Needless to say, this game probably has one of the furthest draw distances outside of the dreamcast/PS2/Xbox generation, pretty epic for the time (1993).

    • Like 1
AtariAge
Forums
Store
General
Follow AtariAge

Copyright ©1998-2021 AtariAge

×
×
  • Create New...