Crazyace
-
Content Count
1,027 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Crazyace
-
-
Huh, I thought the PSX actually supported a full 16-bit color mode, not just 15-bit RGB (at least 5-6-5 RGB should have been supported), maybe that was the saturn, I know the N64 was limited to using 15-bit RGB highcolor. That makes the 32x's and SNES's palettes seem a lot less limited. Could the PSX index directly from teh 24-bit palette when using a 256 color display?
It didn't work that way - the PSX didn't have a palette in the same way as VGA ( or even the jaguar ) - it's display was either 16 bit ( 5.5.5 plus stencil bit ) or 24 bit. When drawing textured sprites or polygons to the 16 bit screen the PSX would use another area of video memory as a CLUT to expand 4 or 8 bit textures, but there wasn't any limit to the number of CLUTs - they were just pointers to memory.
-
Look again. The rotation of the enemies are way to smooth. That would require a serious amount of sprites
to do that. I can tell they are voxel ememies as well. You showed a PC game with almost no enemies and
a not suprisingly lame PSX demo with the camera point DOWN onto the landscape, further relaxing the need
for the voxels to be projected and therfore computed more heavily.
Get over it...you are just wrong on this one my friend.
I dont know - I looked at the game , and the tree's are all forward facing ( billboard sprites ) - and the enemies seem to only have 16 or 32 frames of rotation - seems workable with sprites. It's still the heart of a really good game for the Jaguar though, and the biggest shame is that it ( and Doom, and BattleSphere ) didn't come out early in the life of the machine and generate console sales. ( I remember reading somewhere that 3D0 sold a million units in japan based on the Streetfighter game - That number of sales may have been enough to keep Atari in the market )
-
OK, it is like YCbCr colorspace then. (so kind of like GTIA's 256 color palette, but with 16x the colors and shades
) But doing so using values indexed from 24-bit RGB. Hmm, wouldn't any indexed 16-bit palette mode on other platforms (slecting from 24-bit RGB) be ablt to acheive similar? (doesn't the PSX allow 16-bit indexing, or is it stuch with 16-bit RGB to work from? -probably 5-6-5 R-G-B -if not selectable between that and 6-5-5 and 5-5-6) Wait... 65.536 entries for selecting 24-bit values would take 192 kB of color RAM... so not for PSX at least...Yes , if you look in the jaguar manual it shows how the colours were picked. The PSX was 5.5.5 RGB , ( it also supports 24 bit for movies and displays, but the 3D hardware only draws triangles in 5.5.5RGB )
Yeah, I think Gorf was talking more in terms of hardware acceleration standards (polygon optimized), with all software rendering it's just a trade-off for what kind of set-up you want to use, any case will require a lot of CPU resourse to back it up -that would go for polygon engines as well of course. (but again, it's all software/CPU driven, basicly controlling a simple bitmapped display -usually 256 colors for the DOS ones)
Voxel's were a good alternative until 3D graphics cards took off - then polygons took over the PC world
- It's a real pity though that SVGA cards never standardised earlier - as it was possible to get 16 bit colour, just not in a standard way that could be used by games ( as VESA didn't really come in till 94ish )How do the actual networking interfacing capabilities/mechanisms compare, BS uses the Jag's buggy DSP UART connector, right (with soem masterful workarounds to address the problems)? The PSX has serial and parallel ports on it (parallel only on early models, I think serial was kept though), and Saturn has the cartridge port (which would more or less be acting as a parallel port for a network adaptor plug-in), otherwise there's only the controller ports, and as I recall some networked PSX games used those. (I know that's what Technopop did for Zero Tolerance on the Genesis/MD, that limited to 2-player networking though -controller port 2 linked to controller port 2)
It's just a UART - the PSX cable links 2 machines directly, ( and the Jaguar links multiple machines in a ring )
-
Comanche says hi,
( 1992 - seemed to be pretty good on my PC )
Oh yeah real great!
To bad you are 8 bits short in color , a boxed in view and a much slower frame rate! Oh, btw is that a 100 MHZ Pentium or higher?(27MHZ Jaguar blows it's dooors off)Next....
No idea what PC it's running on ... but it came out in 1992, which was why I linked it for you, as you seem to think voxels weren't used till recently
About 3 minutes on this - seems like Voxel's to me
but I'll let you decide, as you seem to have a better understanding of my graphics knowledge ( It's a PSX demo )Oh yeah another great one! Choppy, crappy, blocky, low color DEMO!!!! I friggin DEMO
that barely can run at 15 FPS from what it looks like. Now add few enemies and some AI
and watch that choke like a frog swallowing a horse. Nice try, but not really. The A8's
can do a full game with voxels....how sad is that?
I think the only sad thing here is your grasp of framerates
but it is a youtube video, so maybe you should check it out on a real playstation before making asinine comparisions with A8 games Now....go see a REAL Voxel engine that is actually part of a game.
You 've already seen Owl's master piece that is clearly not only superior
in ever way, it is actually a game you can play, and I doubt its dropping
under 30FPS. I can't really comment much more on Owl's deal as I've only
seen but a few seconds of it but clearly it blows away this pathetic demo
on the PSX, which BTW points the camera downward to help the voxel engine
from drawing REAL heights.
show me the PSX doing this...then I might be impressed.
Notice the extreme heights of the landscape at 60 FPS in CRY color,
with voxel clouds and enemies. Try that on a PC or a PSX and you get
choke. Again, nice try but not really.
Owl's game and Phase Zero are both cool ( and it's a real shame PZ didn't make it out, as it's the kind of game the jaguar really needed ) - I think the enemies are just sprites though.
-
As far as PZ goes, yeah you'd be able to pull off a less than atractive polygon based height
map landscape but you are NOT going to draw voxels like the blitter can. If this were the case,
not only would the PSX have done so, the PC would have back then as well. It is not until recently
that the PC can do this and that is only because of the ridiculous speed of the processors.
Neither the PC or the PSX are geared toward voxel...they are poly engines and the blitter in the
Jaguar in that time period will whip both there asses in this respect hands dwon.
I dont think you understand the difference in what a polygon and a voxel is, or you would known why the PSX or Saturn(or even the PC's of that day) could not pull them off.
About 3 minutes on this - seems like Voxel's to me
but I'll let you decide, as you seem to have a better understanding of my graphics knowledge ( It's a PSX demo ) -
yes - and I'm saying that the PSX wouldn't have trouble with the physics and AI
- It's a more powerful machine, after all.Um, sorry my friend but no ......It is graphically more powerful in polygans ability.
It can not match the Jaguar in computing and voxel landscapes, deal with AI and game logic
on the level of BS and still maintain a 60 fps frame rate that only gets more efficient the
more units you network together. The PSX stops at 2 units...The Jaguar with BS can do 32.
The Jaguars work together and now you have serious multi processing going on. The PSX just
does not have the ability on the same level computationally. One MIPS can not out perform
two J-RISC's on its best day.
I have to disagree with you here
- One MIPs with cache and 3D geometry coprocessor, can computationally match the two J-Riscs.The networking on BS is a different topic, and I'm really looking forward to playing it ( networked if possible , although I guess only one person has enough Jaguars to really show it off )
Show me just one game on the PSX that even comes close to the AI and game logic of BS. IT
never happened and it never will. Without any networking going on the Jaguar will out compute
the PSX.
Once I play it I'll see if I can think of anything - but if the AI is so wonderful I think it's more the extreme skill of the programmers rather than something magical in the Jaguar chipset.
I have been told by MANY PSX developers who also coded for the JAguar syaing that the Jaguar
is by far more capable in math just on one risc versus the MIPS.
Now that's interesting - I guess that must be comparing the multiply and divide cycle times , as they aren't as quick in terms of cycle counts. However it's a major jump to generalise that to 'math' in general.
-
That's the reality - both the Saturn and the PSX would be able to reproduce BattleSphere - they are more powerful systems than the jaguar. The only thing that would limit them is the fact that neither machine was ever pitched with multiplayer link cables by the manufacturer.
No that is not the reality. The very fact that they lack the networking is why they are too weak to ever
be able to match the Jaguar in this respect. It is the multi hook ups of the JAg and the unique means of
true parallel processing that not even the Saturn can do with it two SH2's. It would stand a much better
chance than the PSx but again, if you had actually read why I stated they can't, instead of once again
assuming you know what you are talking about, you'd have known this. The PSX and Saturn are graphically
more capable in the polygon arena but not in the computing arena. It aint the case.
How much better does BattleSphere get when it's networked? ( I'm assuming you're saying that the networking is the advantage here - because you don't really make much sense otherwise )
My point about the networking is that there's no real difference between the hardware used for link cables on the PSX, and the Jaguar - only the wiring is different. So exactly the same networked AI could be implemented if it had to be.
And the Saturn and PSX are computationally more capable than the Jaguar as well as graphically more capable - ( The Saturn is generally even more capable than the PSX )
-
As far as PZ goes, yeah you'd be able to pull off a less than atractive polygon based height
map landscape but you are NOT going to draw voxels like the blitter can. If this were the case,
not only would the PSX have done so, the PC would have back then as well. It is not until recently
that the PC can do this and that is only because of the ridiculous speed of the processors.
Neither the PC or the PSX are geared toward voxel...they are poly engines and the blitter in the
Jaguar in that time period will whip both there asses in this respect hands dwon.
I dont think you understand the difference in what a polygon and a voxel is, or you would known why the PSX or Saturn(or even the PC's of that day) could not pull them off.
Comanche says hi,
( 1992 - seemed to be pretty good on my PC )
-
I'll definitely come again - it was a good event. ( I'll actually looking forward to one this year , and I'll try to get some interesting code ready to show )
-
yes - and I'm saying that the PSX wouldn't have trouble with the physics and AI
- It's a more powerful machine, after all. -
And what exactly is 16-bit CRY mode, I've read a bit of the Jag's hardware summary online (not any proper hardware doccuments though -and the FAQ on AA isn't too much to go by -and I can't seem to find soem articles on Jag sector which were there a year ago). I'd assume it was an indexted 16-bit color mode (so a selected palette from the full 24-bitmaster palette rather than a fixed RGB palette as with the 32x obviously), but does the Jag even work from an RGB palette or use soemthing else, like YCbCr colorspace? And from the sound of it, CRY is more than just a normal 16-bit indexed palette. (as in, more than just 65,536 entries seleced from a 24-bit palette)
Think of CRY mode in the same way as component video - or SVHS , one byte represents the colour (like chroma on SVHS) and one byte represents the brightness ( luma on SVHS ) - You have brightness that matches full 24 bit RGB , but a much more limited set of colours to pick from.
If it were one of the first games out for Jaguar, it would have rocked the gaming worldand the PS1 would never be able to generate such a AI and game logic monster. One MIPS
can not compete on it's best day against dual J-RISC chips. The best you could hope for
on the PS1 is a texture mapped wanna be.
This is getting more off topic, but, how about the saturn for comparison? I think this did come up before and you mentioned it could be closer at least (outside of networking -I'd immagine the Saturn would have used the cartridge port for any kind of network adaptor though -it did get a modem supported by the nelink/seganet service). Anyway, you've got the dual SH2s, plus a 11.3 MHz 68EC000 which was intended mainly for controllign the audio subsystem, but I beleive it wasn't limited to that. (it does work on its own bus though, the dedicated 512 kB of used for audio) There's also the SH1, but I think that's completely dedicated to controlling the CDROM drive. (and a DSP coprocessor intended to help with 3D math)
But again, I mean no disrespect to battleSphere or Scatologic for that matter, that really was an oversimplified comparison (albeit intended to be considdering the perspective of a relatively simple audience), and I definitely hope I eventually get a chance to play it. I doubt I'll be dissapointed.
That's the reality - both the Saturn and the PSX would be able to reproduce BattleSphere - they are more powerful systems than the jaguar. The only thing that would limit them is the fact that neither machine was ever pitched with multiplayer link cables by the manufacturer.
-
Such hyperbole always makes me want to play BattleSphere, but then the price always stops me
I was always surprised the 4play didn't make a PC version at least - there's nothing really special about it graphically, and the network play would fit a lot more on the PC. I guess I'll have to hope that there's a Jagfest this year where someone brings a copy
I'd disagree on not being able to reproduce it on the PSX though - even something like Phase Zero could be reproduced on the PSX. ( The CRY mode is the one thing that couldn't be - the PSX supports 24 bit RGB, but it's graphics hardware is completely designed around drawing 16 bit RGB pixels )
-
Comparing Jag Doom and PSX doom is actually pretty interesting, as they are both good versions.
The Jag version has really smooth lighting that's much better than the PC 256 colour look, but it is half res.
The PSX version has different coloured lighting - better than the PC version, but not as smooth as the jaguar look. However it's drawing at full res, so it's running twice as much as the Jaguar version.
In terms of frame rate I think the PSX version wins out - but the Jaguar version is still pretty amazing. ( It's far better than the 32X/3D0/SNES versions available at the time )
-
Isn't the main reason that ROF is faster the fact that it only uses 47 lines ( In the 160x96 mode ) - and Eidolon uses a lot more lines ( in the 160x192 mode which matches the c64 better )
Koronis uses around 90 lines of GTIA mode 10 - which is completely different to the way the C64 works ( hence the extra shades ) so the 2 versions are less comparable.
-
Top trumps..
ST CPU 8mhz
Amiga CPU 7.09mhz
The thing is it's only some weird folk who would want to compare the A8 and ST to such a degree anyway. Fair enough asking the question, "which do you prefer?", but this thread got a bit bonkers.
*edit*
Juuuuust in case, this post is partially a joke
Pete
Oh no, I can actually envision a Top Trumps game containing all of the 8 bit and 16 bit machines now
-
What we need for these threads is Top Trumps cards and the arguments should be decided with those.
Pete
I think it’s hilarious how the ST fails so utterly against the Amiga that it’s reduced to fighting with the Amiga’s little brother (and only just holding it’s own.)
No arguments there , ST vs Amiga was the 16 bit version of Spectrum vs C64
-
I was just pointing out that despite people arguing back and forth on here with some people saying, "I'm right because I say so" and other people saying, "I'm right and here's actual proof" that we may as well use trump cards and say, "Atari 800, CPU, 1.8mhz!" only to be countered with, "Atari ST, CPU, 8mhz!!! POW!"
Yeah numbers in that case aren't the whole story but it's pretty much what the outcome should be and would stop all the bickering Pete
As long as you put in 'Joystick port 1.79MHz / 7815Kb' and 'Colours 128 / 512' we can play all day
-
Hmm, but isn't a VGA connector (outside of additonal reserved pins and data lines -USB hubs and such built into monitors) just analog RGB connections with separate Vsync and Hsync pins and individual gnd lines? Other than the 31 kHz minimum hsync limitation (not even true on early EGA/CGA compatible VGA monitors) it's just anlog RGB, any other limitations would depend on the sourse's output and monitor itsself. (again, early VGA monitors should actually accept 15 kHz stuff like Atari/Commodore RGB monitors)
And int he YUV case, at some point the YPbPr/s-video/composite signals will need to be transcoded into RGB signals on a CRT. (digital displays are a separate issue)
There are other differences between TV and VGA , both gamma power, and the colour temperature are different. ( And I guess, from Lazarus's initial point that there might be overdrive on R,G,or B - but you could just turn up the brightness to fix that. )
( I guess if you map all YCbCr values to RGB you can get negative values - which aren't valid for a normal RGB display )
-
You can play high resolution movies on the Post-It notes as long as you draw them flick book stylee. Hand drawing graphics is quicker and easier and therefore superior to drawing anything on the ZX81.
Funnily enough there are some hires games for the ZX81 ( via some awesome software hacks
) -
-
Guys, drop it and move on or I will lock this thread and lock any future "vs" threads that pop up.
..Al
Please do!
I really do regret I started this thread. As said before it was not my intention to get all this crap.
The topic bring good things for me too. I really enjoy my Atari ST again. Thanks to the Atari ST fans, I look with a complete different look to that machine. It's a great system, and next to my Atari 8bit it is fun too!
But due to some people here, this thread is finished in garbage. Thanks guys. Very well done.
@Albert: So please, please lock this thread, and perhaps you even can delete it at all. I'm the topicstarter, and I really have a not so good feeling being TS from this braindead thread.
The topic was interesting , and the results of the poll show a far more balanced view than a lot of the back and forth arguing would suggest ( even Atariksi only voted 'most things better on a8' ) - It's always interesting seeing the evidence given as backup - I would never have looked at Photochrome if I hadn't picked up on ST stuff again, and PeteD's APAC conversions ( and the odd C64 picture that crept in ) are also interesting to look at. Even the 160x240x16 mixed resolution picture Atariksi put up was cool - if it was on A8 I think it's a really really good piece of handiwork.
-
Ah well, I should really read all of the thread overnight before replying
-
You asked in post #1288. Sorry, I haven't had time to write my own application to map 24-bit RGB to A8s palette nor any need for it as it's distinctively clear from logic and analysis that A8 palette is superior to ST. I bet I can write a 24-bit to 3-3-3 RGB pretty fast. AND by 0xE0 each primary. Photochrome writers must be geniuses.
Well, I was asking you to back up your point - I assumed you had the technical knowledge to do it. The parrot picture isn't that important to me - I just placed it as an example from the web of a 128 colour picture.
Don't worry though - I'm still waiting for your Kaliya picture on A8 , as I've said several times, as I'm interested in how that looks on an A8. ( If you've only made it on photoshop just let me know, as I can stop asking for it )
-
It's not to do with resolution. You basically assume chroma is similar in entire 4*4 area although in reality it can be a completely different color. But you don't do that for luminance.
I think you need to read up again - subsampling chroma is effectively low pass filtering the colour, or 'dropping the resolution'
-
As I said, Photoshop has problems with mapping to A8's color space for some reason. Perhaps, there's some plug-in to fix it.
What's photoshop got to do with the A8?
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Does Jag Doom run in highcolor mode?
in Atari Jaguar
Posted
PZ doesn't actually seem any higher res than comanche? - The near voxels look blocky in some of the videos, but the mid to far seems to be 320x200 on the PC ( only 256 colours as normal for VGA , but as far as I can tell PZ could be 256 colours as well )
Magic carpet was another PC game using voxels, it came out on the PSX as well, but I didn't play it that much.
I think once you get to a 266MHz PC you're well into Pentium 2/3 territory, and your PC is likely to have local bus VESA graphics with true colour support. Voxels wont choke at that speed.