Danno

Bob, I apologize for interrupting your thread with Zylon's petty forum troll bullshit. It seems he can't post in a thread without trying to correct someone to make himself feel better. In fact - after looking at a collection of his posts, it appears that all he's capable of is wise-assed comments and being a spelling/grammar Nazi. The sad thing is, he's a troll on an Atari messageboard. I guess he couldn't handle the flame wars of some of the more highly-populated "regular people" messageboards out there, so he comes here to pump up his ego and pick on Atari geeks. It is funny though, as he usually get's owned by everyone who posts after him, because he's usually wrong. At any rate, I'm done with him. I put trolls like him on ignore. He's not contributing anything productive to the thread, or the board for that matter, other than whining and acting like a attention-deprived bitch.

Left/right looks good, but up/down is back to the robotic slit-eyes. I realize the asymmetric design I mocked up might take some getting used to, but IMHO it does a better job of capturing the spirit of the original design (gotta love those big saucer-shaped eyes). I'm curious what other people think about this. 863250[/snapback] Why don't you download my version of this hack? Oh right - mine looks just like that. Except, it's not a "mock-up". it's an actual hack.

Actually, left when they're going up, right when they're going down. But yeah, it's impossible to get centered pixels with the available resolution. All solutions are imperfect, so it comes down to trying to determine which imperfect solution looks best overall. "Best", of course, being subjective. Might be fun to start a poll. PS-- Danno, please, stop talking. Everything you say is wrong. 863454[/snapback] Zylon - fuck off. In case you hadn't noticed because you're too busy running your yap, I submitted an actual hack here that's pretty decent - you submitted a "mock up" jpg that's physically impossible to do with the pixel count in this game. You said EXACTLY the same thing I said. The eyes can't be "perfect" with the pixel count in this game. I suggest you stop ordering people around and learn to hack the games yourself before you run your uninformed mouth again, asshole.

7800.

There just aren't enough pixels to make the eyes look "right". That's why they are square in the original 7800 Ms.Pac-Man. That's also why the dots are so big. They are 4 pixels. if you reduce it to one pixel, they will be too small and they will be offset, and look like they need to be moved over one. Zylon - previous mock-up looks great - but I think the 7800 would need a whole new Pac-Man engine written to make that version display correctly. This is just a hack. There is only so much you can do.

OK, I have to say that Tile Molester is just about the coolest thing I've ever played with. Here's my take on the fixed up ghosts and Pac-Man for Bob's Pac-Man and the Original Ms. Pac-Man for the 7800. So Bob - what do you use to edit the mazes? and how do you know what modes to set in Tile Molester? I've tried opening a few other games but haven't been able to figure out what mode to view them in to get discernable graphics. pacghostfix.zip

What program are you using to hack the graphics on this, Bob?

Exactly my point. And the more stuff you pack into it, the more thinking windows has to do to display it properly. Granted on a P4 3.6Ghz 800FSB 2.0GB RAM beast, you might not notice any lag, but on your general run of the mill desktop, basically anything slower than 2.8 GHz, you'll likely notice a bit of slowdown.

I'm thinking maybe I'll just register a fake username at ebay and then place an order for teh remaining 97 he has "in stock". Then never pay him a dime, so he loses money on the listing.

No.

You need to get a taller TV.

He really needs to be removed. His other sale is "Secret of Mana" and in his add, a potential buyer asked him if the Cart & box are in good shape and he responds "Excellent"? What a prick.

Shall we snail-mail spam him?

Your ROMS and for the downloading are happy happy and full of creamy joy. Goodness comes to those who CC2.

Exactly.

No it's not. You can't just "Download rom and put them on cart". If it were that simple, there would be no need for a CC2.

Nope. But I bet you're pissing off a lot of people at the MPAA.

That doesn't make any sense... just because I have a 100MB text file on my desktop doesn't mean that file is taking up 100MB of RAM... 861682[/snapback] That's not what I said. I said they are resident in ram. That means tha there is a reference to them in ram taking up resources. Just like when you open Windows explorer and view the contents of a folder. I didn't say the whole file was in Ram. The more items you have ina folder, the longer the refresh. Windows does more than just display an icon when you place things on your desktop. It retains filesize info (which it must re-read every time you mouse over it), executable associations which it needs to path to, the file's location on the desktop, etc.

I had toyed with the idea of putting one of these in my 7800, but now that I've taken a look at some of the feedback, I've decided against it. However - one thing I did find is a slightly different way to connect it to a cable-ready coaxial jack on your tv, with crytal clear picture quality. I've seen people advertise the "direct connect" adapters that allow you to plug your Atari's video cable into a cable jack. They work pretty good, but the problem with all RF output is sheilding. even with the direct connect jacks, you still get interference because the shielding on the Atari RCA to RCA video cable still sucks, even though you've cut out the interference problems with the TV/Game switch. But Radio Shack also carries a "direct connect" that has a MALE RCA jack (to plug into the Atari) and a FEMALE Cable/Coax jack which allows you to use a high end gold plated Coaxial Cable, instead of the standard crappy aluminum sheilded Atari cable. I get absolutely no interference, and a crystal clear picture with great color and sharpness. and it cost me $4.99 and No soldering.

Inky's not supposed to be green in the manual, is he?

It all depends upon where the icons are drawn from, what programs they are associated with, and what file types they are. everything on your desktop is resident in ram if it's being displayed. Same thing with your temp folders. even though windows may mot be accessing every file in that folder - when there are a large number of files there, it slows the crap out of your machine. Same with temporary internet files.

LOL. Ok, hotshot. Have fun loading up your desktop with useless crap. Tell you what - just use no background at all, just a black background, and then cover it with 100+ meg files, and see how long your screen refresh and startup and shutdown takes. You're a dope.

Actually - the gradient colored outline box provides all the necessary space for temporary placement of desktop icons. filling any more space on your desktop than that particular area with extra files, icons & shorcuts will do nothing but slow the PC's performance down anyway.

Dead solid perfect, Bob. Hey - here's a suggestion - can you add teh attract mode to regular Ms. Pac-man?

Your Tv's HD capability has noting to do with the picture it's getting from your atari. There aren't any video mods for the Atari that convert the signal to HD. You will get a better picture using a video mod than you will using the RF output. The vertical line you're seeing is most likely due to the fact that your HDTV's screen aspect ratio is much wider than a standard definition TV. Atari's display mechanics took large amounts of picture overscan into consideration, which is why your older standard TV doesn't display taht line. But newer, HD style telvisions have much less picture overscan, so you may see elements you weren't able to see before on the edges of the screen.