Jump to content

pixelpedant

+AtariAge Subscriber
  • Content Count

    556
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,062 Excellent

About pixelpedant

  • Rank
    Dragonstomper

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

2,608 profile views
  1. Naturally. I'm just happy they took good pictures. Since that didn't cost me anything
  2. Further to that: Rotor Raiders (Romox) and Typo II (Romox)
  3. Some great pictures of CIB Hen Pecked from an Ebay auction:
  4. Awesome! Again, love that VGA is still an option, for those of us with RGB monitors we're already happy with.
  5. I have to say, I feel like the difference that getting even just a dozen more F18A boards out there will make is huge. Since as it is, we've got various now regular forum and community members who are active enthusiasts, and who've never had access to the things the F18A offers. Even just getting several of those folks an F18A does a lot to expand the user base for 80 column or F18A-palettised (or otherwise F18A-using) software. So I'm very glad to see it. So all the credit in the world to Hans for pursuing this. For one thing, I'll be glad to see the user base for T80XB software grow a little more.
  6. Nice! Yeah, it's a great game, and really doesn't require the MBX at all. Only advantage with the MBX is that all the speech samples always play without interruption when playing via MBX and they sound a little better than the TI samples to me. But on the other hand, to me it doesn't make any sense to play with the MBX joystick, since the game is strictly four-directional.
  7. Yeah, a single Fighter specialising in melee is the most difficult starting party I've played, and Rogue would be the same kind of pickle. And I agree Hero is very strong, especially in the early game. I do think the most difficult start is with a single non-magical class (fighter, rogue). A major factor in this, though, is just whether you know where various companions are and how they're acquired. Since a couple of those can be picked up really quick for support, if you do.
  8. Yeah, my main problem with Pole Position is that they didn't use a true chase cam (where player perspective moves with the car) on the VIC-20 and TI-99/4A versions. Despite implementing one on Atari's own platforms. And the roadside striping which is the main thing that conveys a sense of motion in other versions is missing in the TI-99 version. So it feels really static. It plays fine overall, and it's a pleasant enough game as long as you don't expect a serious challenge. So I enjoyed it. But it's definitely not everything it could be. TI-99 is still awaiting its ultimate racing game. Pole Position and Driving Demon don't quite get there. Of the two, though, I consider Driving Demon more compelling, as far as long term challenge goes.
  9. In spirit, it is changed. In reality, I don't think it's possible to. Stop the count! There's been improper voting! Nefarious Donkey Kong fans have clearly conspired to steal the Atarisoft vote from its rightful segmental arthropod champion.
  10. You're absolutely right. Woops. Added it. All the more so a silly oversight given I just mentioned James G. Landowski, who was the dev on that one (and Dig Dug). Yeah, I do genuinely like it. Frickin tough game. The third stage is a real bastard. But if you like a challenge, definitely cool.
  11. Seems like the Donkey Kong fans definitely have it. I should give it a chunk of my time. Hipster that I am, I've played TI-99 Donkey Kong very little and instead have played a whole lot of TI-99 Cannonball Blitz (which is a clone of sorts). Though actually, Cannonball Blitz was done by James G. Landowski, who was a programmer on a couple TI-99 Atarisoft titles. So in that sense, it's cut from the same cloth.
  12. Personally, I think Jungle Hunt is my number one. It was like nothing else I'd played on my TI-99. And I'm for some reason a sucker for games (see also: Fantasy) with multiple distinct phases of gameplay.
  13. Parsec invades my 2600 (thanks to forum member hloberg's port):
  14. Yeah, so that looks like it's just the LPC data itself without the necessary additional values CALL SAY will need. However, those are easy enough to add in. Assuming this is just the raw LPC data, you'd just need to add three bytes to the start of the pattern. Namely, CHR$(96) CHR$(0) CHR$(X) where X = the number of bytes of LPC data which follow. So presuming a string variable LPC$ contains the raw LPC pattern, SAYOUT$=CHR$(96)&CHR$(0)&CHR$(LEN(LPC$))&LPC$ CALL SAY(,SAYOUT$) should give you your XB output. It'll still be missing the stop nibble if >D9 is the final value in the source pattern as you mention. But this isn't obligatory for successful output of a single string. Could add CHR$(15) to the end on point of principle, though, so it's there. In this case, the length byte would also need to be modified such that the result is SAYOUT$=CHR$(96)&CHR$(0)&CHR$(LEN(LPC$)+1)&LPC$&CHR$(15) CALL SAY(,SAYOUT$) I really should play with this program myself, though.
  15. Well, if it gives you an LPC speech string which is structured correctly, you can just feed it directly to CALL SAY. The way you can feed a value generated by CALL SPGET to it. Patterns in this context always begin with 0110000000000000 and end with the 1111 somewhere in the last byte, where 01100000 is the Speak-External command and 1111 is the stop code. But each byte is inverted and the actual values contained within the frames are of variable length and are not aligned with the bytes themselves. So the actual speech frames are utterly obscured until you flip the bytes. I haven't gotten around to playing with BlueWizard either (mainly because I don't have a Mac). Should do, now that it's been ported to Python. But it'd strike me as odd if it weren't already correctly structured for use. I'd just check that it begins with 0110000000000000 and the first non-zero values in the final byte are 1111. If so, you should be good to go to just feed it to CALL SAY as a string.
×
×
  • Create New...