WAVE 1 GAMES
-
Content Count
1,586 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by WAVE 1 GAMES
-
-
How about merging the cock fighting and boxing ideas by making cartoon style boxing chickens?
-
A few years ago I was gonna do this for PC
And a pig racing game where the pigs had little wheels with tires instead of legs....
Perhaps those 2 older ideas of mine could be recycled for this?
I have to say I rather like the stranger more outrageous ideas given here. The aliens in an alien world theme for example could be applied very easily to Tennis. You would actually get a tennis game on Jag and at the same time something that hasn't been done before.
Perhaps boxing could be boxing robots (kind of like Teleroboxer)
Maybe the cock fighting could be over the top robotic roosters that shoot missles and what not.
Any other ideas?
-
37 minutes ago, davidcalgary29 said:Or keep cockfighting and replace roosters with small, ugly reptiles, and make it an alien-themed ring with comic overtones: no one's going to complain about bloodsport then. Or replace the animals with rubber or robot chickens. People will love it!
That's thinking outside the box. Robo-cock fighting
-
2 hours ago, Welshworrier said:Maybe replace cockfighting with bear baiting.
Also oddball sports games? Tennis, bowling and boxing????
Bear baiting huh? I just keep learning about new sports! Another blood sport too.
And yeah I know Tennis and Boxing are definitely sports. I just meant a collection of sports games that aren't your typical sports you see in most mainstream sports video games.
I don't consider bowling a sport at all, but other people do Because I guess it technically IS one
-
What about pig racing? Or horse racing?
Cock fighting is considered a sport im South America. A blood sport and more so gambling than anything else.
I guess people are not im favor of that one
-
7 minutes ago, atari2600land said:I doubt anyone here wants to see a cockfighting sim.
Are you sure about that? I think I should do a poll on that one
also what is cornhole? I have never heard of that beforenever mind I looked it up -
So in the middle of working on JagZombies 2 today I lost focus and came up with an idea for a collection of sports games. I didn't start on anything yet except a logo and some possible backgrounds.
I thought lets do a collection of oddball sports games on the Jaguar and Call it WAVE 1 SPORTS.
Now first and foremost I love me some tennis, so I thought a good tennis game similar to Virtua Tennis or Mario Tennis (VB version) would be a good fit
The other game I am 100% sure I would want to include is a blood sport with in game gambling. Cock Fighting.
The other 2 ideas I had were Jag-Boxing, which I started last year and left unfinished and Bowling similar to the old PC/MAC game Alley 19.
but I'm not married to the idea of boxing or bowling.
So..... The reason for posting this thread is to gauge interest in a sports game collection for the Jag. I wont actually be starting on this for a while, but I would like to know what kind of sports games others would like to see in such a collection and what do you think about the choices I have already came up with?
We have seen soccer. We have seen basketball, hockey and American football on Jag, so nothing along those lines.
feel free to throw your favorite sports idea into the hat!
-
I have a spare skunkboard that the usb port came off of. I dont think a new port can be soldered on because the solder points also came off. You want it?
It still works btw
-
1
-
-
32 minutes ago, Machine said:I learned a new word today!
21 minutes ago, joeatari1 said:I Me too! Thanks @Sauron!
Lol y'all are silly.
At least some good came from all of that.
-
16 minutes ago, Chris Brockman said:Why do you argue with Cyrano every time he posts on your threads? Just ignore him. Every time you get into it with him your threads just devolve. You know you do not have to respond to everything he says right or wrong or whatever, the guy knows a hundred times what you do about Jaguar programming you should just take advice or criticism if he gives it, be happy and just move on man.
This is not Cyrano, this is somebody else. There is no advice or criticism being given here. Just a pointless argument about a "what if" scenerio.
It's completely off topic.
-
1 hour ago, agradeneu said:I know. But since you are aware you can't code the Jaguar, isn't it time for you to just back off and stop telling nonsense?
Just for the record:
- you can perfectly parallax scroll an 900Kbyte 1024x900 pixel big graphic layer and an 330x300 pixel 16 bit backdrop at 60 FPS, with animated sprites.
You think an 352x224 object is "big" and pushing the limits? See, there is enough bandwidth to do MUCH more.
1024 X 900 16 BIT???? Combined with the 330 X 300? I don't think so. You didn't say the 1024 X 900 was 16 bit, you just said "big graphic layer" if this 1024 X 900 imaginary graphic you are talking about is 4 or 8 bit then you are no longer talking about the same imaginary scenerio you were arguing about before. You have now set up a whole new imaginary scenerio. You also are not saying if there is music, sound and over 16 other 16 bit animated objects moving on screen. You are changing the variables to fit your narrative
I would also like to point out that you stated ALL graphics in Native are 16 bit but then you said some are 8 bit. Well which is it? Are they all 16 bit or is it some 8 bit and some 16 bit? Native also has graphics tearing and NO sound which makes it a bad example to use for your pointless argument anyway.
Then you said that you were sure Rayman was ALL 16 bit graphics but then admitted that the background layers could be 8 bit. Well which is it?
You are still making a pointless argument with me about a game with all 16 bit graphics and large ones at that with paralax and you keep giving examples of games that supposedly do this but then every one of your examples also use 256 CLUT for some graphics..... So in the end none of your examples are ALL 16 bit graphics.
Fishin' Frenzy is NOT all 16 bit graphics. It is also NOT taxing the system as I have taken the measures based on my experience using RB+ to conserve where possible.
You feel that because you made some artwork for some games in the past and you have seen some other people pull some stuff off with the GPU that this makes you qualified to talk down to me and shit on my efforts. It does not.
I believe you are trying to say I am being arrogant but the irony here is you are the one being arrogant.
"I was right! I got confirmation from the developer ALL graphics are 16 bit..... Except some of them are 8 bit"
Wtf is that?
You have the audacity to tell me that I need to back off yet you are the one attacking me and telling me about how I don't know how to do things that I'm not even attempting to do in the first place because it's unnecessary.
No it's time for you to back off, not me.
-
1 hour ago, agradeneu said:It is clear you need several screen wide layers to hit the limit. (None of that I see in Wave ONE Games.)
- "Native" scrolls layered 16 bit backdrops, several screens wide, plus a level layer, plus 100+ sprites, plus foreground objects, at 60 FPS.
The graphics are 16 bit, I got that info from the dev himself. All graphics run within 1 MB RAM.
No it's not several screenwide layers before you start to notice performance hits when you are talking about 16 bit you only need 2 or 3 combined with a bunch of 16 bit sprites before you notice performance lag.
And I did say 352 X 224 16 bit.
Native also does all of what you said with graphics TEARING. This is a hit on performance, the very thing we don't want and Native doesn't even have sound.
Even if you know a way of getting it to do those things without performance hits (ie graphics tearing) these large 16 bit graphics DO tax the bus, that is the fact that I was stating.
You are also completely missing the fact that I am using RB+ and not GPU specific assembly code.
This entire argument is completely pointless as I am not making the game with large 16 bit backgrounds. This fixation you have with judging my skill level and what I am capable of and what I am not capable of is ridiculous.
So let me save you some trouble. Can I write GPU specific code to make some other game use large screenwide 16 bit images scroll in conjunction with more than 16 other 16 bit objects and also have music and sound without graphics tearing or lag? At the moment no I can not. And for this project there is no reason to because there is another way. Can other people do this? Of course they can.
There is nothing wrong with the direction that I am taking with the development of Fishin' Frenzy. There is something wrong with you having a snarky attitude and trying to school me about something I am not even doing. This guy cubanismo said I could conserve on memory by doing the things he suggested, I agreed with him because these are things I was already doing anyway. You come in with all of this other extra stuff. For what purpose? I asked you before, what is it that you are trying to accomplish here? Throw my thread off track? Seems that way. Your remarks from the very beginning were demeaning and condescending. By reading what you wrote one could come to the conclusion that you think very little of this project, as if it were child like in nature. If that is the case then why are you still so invested in arguing with me?
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, agradeneu said:Sauron: Read again.
yeah I still don't get how this is me bragging or saying I am the best coder? I am talking about a specific scenario here that I am not even doing. My comment is focused on the actual technical aspect at hand in this specific scenario. (Not who the coder is) and it does have a negative impact on the performance, do you believe this specific scenario has zero impact on performance? REALLY? I think you are either (A) misunderstanding where I am coming from or (B) intentionally taking my comment out of context
I would like to believe it is (A)
-
9 minutes ago, joeatari1 said:Frogz and Fast Food. I purchased them second hand from another AA member that was cleaning house of their Jag stuff.
Wow those games seem like so long ago. Doesn't feel like it but it's only been 3 years. I think 2020 had been kind of a timeslip. With everything going on this year it seems like the year from hell and will never end. Thats part of the reason I started Fishin' Frenzy. For some reason working on this game is blissful. This particular game takes me away from it all. I think it's just looking at the little fishies that gets me to be honest.
Anyway yeah I'm going to continue working on this one. It's pretty straight forward as far as a straight conversion goes. The only big difference here should be the last few levels of the game which I mentioned before in the arcade version those last levels are unfinished and sloppy. So will be a custom job here.
I'm also entertaining the idea of rotary controls here and I'm hoping to get help from another AA member on this.
The thought of mouse controls for this game makes me cringe. I don't want to do that here, I don't think it would be a good fit. Not for this game anyway.
-
1
-
-
35 minutes ago, joeatari1 said:At any rate Jeff, please carry on with this. I am excited to see what you can do and what can become of this game. The Jag needs something like this and you have a great base started. I have a couple of your other games and enjoy them but only for short periods of time as they have a high difficulty level even just starting out.
I wasn't aware you had any of my games. If I may ask which ones?
-
35 minutes ago, agradeneu said:Well, despite this fact, he insisted on "that no coder could do better than him". I think I understood the message very well.
Wtf are you talking about? I never said anything of the sort. You are the one talking down to people about their little game and throwing words around like "I'm sorry but you are asking for it" like really dude? Asking for what? Your arrogance? No I didn't ask for that. Like grfoh you can't be serious right now.
30 minutes ago, CyranoJ said:He likes saying things like that... oblivious to the fact that he's using a compiled language and a full API library
except I didn't say anything like that at all.
Also I might add that it doesn't fucking matter if I'm using RB+ or if I coded the game in assembly. Large 352 X 224 16 bit moving images are going to take a harder hit on the bus than 4 bit or 8 bit. So why even use them if it's not necessary? If you say "no Jeff, there is no significant difference" then you are just a liar.
-
4 minutes ago, atari2600land said:So does that mean a CLUT can have up to 256 colors in it? If that's the case, then how does someone using Raptor Basic achieve this? In my programming with it, it seems like a CLUT can only have 16 colors in it.
When you want to use an 8 bit image you are using all 256 colors from an 8 bit pallette. So you don't designate the cluts to 16 individual 4 bit images. You set it to 0 and use an 8 bit image. This lets you use all 256 colors but if you want to use a 4 bit image you still can but it will need to pull from that same 256 color image you chose. (Like fishin frenzy arcade does with the text)
When you set up your object in the object list change the color mode to 8 bit and for CLUT put no_CLUT. I think you can also put 0 but I might be wrong.
4 bit objects work the same way when using a 256 CLUT but you definitely have to set the CLUT to 0 here in the object list
There is a tutorial page for this in the RB+ subforum. ggn does a fantastic job explaining this stuff
-
29 minutes ago, agradeneu said:I just wrote that, if you care to read again. So you are 100% correct on Rayman, but it contradicts all the BS you claimed/boasted about your game "taxing" the Jaguar.
So you might have an professional eye for Rayman, but regarding your own game, you are acting like a blind amateur.
I never bragged or said my game was taxing the Jaguar. What I said was I AM NOT using 16 bit backgrounds and foregrounds because I know that it WILL tax the Jaguar. How do I know this? Because of course I already tried it AND IT DID. Then I said to myself why the hell am I making this a 16 bit graphic if the source is 256? Then after looking at what colors from the 256 color pallette the image is actually using I find that it is only 32 colors so silly me for thinking only using those 32 colors would give a boost in performance.... Which it did... (Cuts back accordingly) At what point was I bragging or boasting????
I never once said my game was taxing the Jaguar. The only thing I said is I didn't want it to. I did say if those backgrounds were 16 bit (which they are not and dont need to be) that it WOULD tax the bus. And I still say it does. You can step around it all you want and say "not if you do it the right way" or "but what if you do this" IT USES MORE BANDWIDTH. Do you deny that a 352X224 16 bit image uses more bandwidth than a 352X224 4 bit image? Or a 352X224 8 bit image? Surely you are joking if you honestly believe that. and in this particular case it's ridiculous to even talk about it. What is the problem? There isn't one as I already have my solution. You keep going on and on about you did this and other people did that but why?
Why do you insist on insulting me and challenging me? I don't get it we are practically saying the same exact things but you just keep going and going.
Did you have an interest in making Fishin Frenzy? Did I somehow steal your thunder by starting the project? Are you just not happy with the overall visual quality/progress of the game from the video I posted? Do you want me to turn the game over to your more "professional" hands?
What the hell do you want? I don't get it
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, atari2600land said:Are you confusing 16-bit with 16 colors? Something with 16 colors is 4-bit, which would be how I would do the fish if I was doing it.
Is this question for me or somebody else?
The fish are all 16 bit. Not 16 colors. You only get 16 different CLUTs for 4 bit graphics and there are way more than 16 type of fish in Fishin Frenzy. So using 4 bit for the fish doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Could be done yes and some of them would probably not look any different at all. Others would though, and then you would eventually run out of pallettes.
-
25 minutes ago, agradeneu said:That is exactly my point, actually.
As for Rayman, the background could be 8 bit, but then it needs to use up a lot colors of the CLUT, because it's quite detailed. That means you really can't use the 256 color CLUT for all graphics (background, layers, sprites) without sacrificing quality. As smooth as Rayman looks, I'm almost sure it uses 16 bit assets for the sprites and tiles.
And if it was 8 bit throughout, KUDOS to the artists to achieve such an impressive result!
It's obvious to me that you hold Rayman in high regard, which you should but does it not occur or seem more reasonable to you that all of the sprites/game objects and the foreground layers (ie the platforms) are all 16 bit and every single one of the background layers are sharing a 256 CLUT? Maybe it's my lack of a "professional eye" but to me eyeballing it, It's kind of obvious that's how its done. I could be wrong, mind you I COULD BE WRONG. But visually to me that is what I see. Especially given how dull (maybe not the right word) the colors of the actual backgrounds are. It also makes a lot more sense to do it that way vs everything being 16 bit. It is a cartoon style of graphics and in most cartoons the background uses duller colors so the foreground stuff is the focus point
.jpg.72107c14d0472958dc2cda1530483e70.jpg)
-
14 minutes ago, LinkoVitch said:unless it was blatantly unnecessary, and scale back as issues arise.
And that was exactly my point.
-
1
-
-
Just now, LinkoVitch said:Nope, I think you should re-read what I put about the reasons for using indexed objects. You are absolutely correct you should use indexed object for those types of images, and I never said otherwise. Save on storage, bandwidth etc, much more efficient.
I *DID* say that you *COULD* use those and the jag would be able to handle it, counter to what you put saying it could not. I don't recommend you do mind, but if done properly the Jag COULD do that.
Ok gotcha. So if one wanted to do this it would be possible if done correctly.
With no impact to performance whatsoever?
But since there is absolutely no need to do it this way I should use indexed images when possible
Thanks.
-
5 minutes ago, LinkoVitch said:I'm going to chip in as there seems to be some confusion with what I said and stuff, so just to add in my 2p
Fishing frenzy most certainly shouldn't tax the jag at all, punting sprites it can do. Of course a badly created object list will overly tax the system for what it is drawing on the screen, but even with a simple list with no branches I'd imagine the jag could happily handle fishing Frenzy.
There seems to be some confusion about the "bit" of colours...Now, this is the confusion.. a 1bit, 2bit, 4bit and 8bit image on the jag are all using 16bit colour :).. the 1,2,4, & 8 refer to the size of the colour index into the CLUT (Colour Look-Up Table). Each entry in the CLUT is 16bit RGB or CRY depending on mode. The index value of a pixel simply points to which colour in that LUT to use. So a 1bit image can be 0 or 1, 2bit = 0-3, 4bit = 0-15, and 8bit = 0 - 255.
The assets are high quality colour, just the pixel data is stored efficiently. Plus backgrounds should be somewhat duller and less detailed to avoid making foreground objects difficult to differentiate.
Not for the graphics, but depending on the complexity you can spam the bus by making too many calls or tie the OP up with too long a list (the whole list is processed every single scan-line, every frame.)
If you have a large image using indexed pixels saves a load of RAM and also memory bandwidth. The OP will like to read it's data in 64bit wide chunks. 1 64bit read is 4x 16bit pixels, 8x 8 bit pixels, 16x 4 bit pixels, 32x 2 bit pixels, and 64 1bit pixels.. so for Jeffs 352 pixel @ 4bit that's 22 reads to read a whole scan-line, vs 176 reads if it were 16bit. (assuming my dodgy mental maths worked there
). Of course if the object is smaller than a single read, you are going to waist a chunk of that potential pixel slurping.
Whilst this may all sound super ossum, it does have it's own cost, in that an indexed Object has to also do a lookup in the CLUT to find the actual colour to paint, so there is additional overhead there, only slight, but still something to bear in mind. oh and you are limited to 256 colours in total shared between all those Indexed objects.
Sorry Jeff, it won't.. not if it's done correctly. When you move something on the screen with the OP, it doesn't actually "move" anything. If you badly build your list, don't make use of branches and a well structured list, or have overly large objects that hang off the sides of the screen, then yeah it's going to struggle and fail. But it is entirely possible to have a full screen image with many layers of parallax.
Sorry if that's a bit all over the place
HTH anyway
So to confirm you are saying that all objects should be 16 bit (including those large backgrounds) and there is no need to worry about it taxing performance at all?
And may I ask what is the overall benefit of having 2 352x224 bmps as 16 bit assets if they only need 32 colors?
Do you not recommend I conserve when possible for overall better performance?
I'm actually not picking a fight and arguing with you I am asking for clarity.
I just don't see the point of having such a large image be 16 bit if it only requires 32 colors and there is no way that doesnt have a negative impact on performance.
I'm talking preventive damage control
-
1 minute ago, agradeneu said:Well I can, because I did the artwork for several Jaguar games.
Ok congratulations on doing artwork for several Jaguar games. Kudos to you. I'm not sure that this fact makes your argument any more valid. Nor does this tidbit of information about your past convince me that I should make all assets of this game 16 bit because it's a "simple" little thing and I shouldn't expect any kind of impact on performance.
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
WAVE 1 SPORTS Collection (Ideas thread)
in Atari Jaguar
Posted
Well it's not really cruel because it wouldn't really be chickens it would be pixels.