Jaguar vs. 3DO?

[DracIsBack]

Normally, posters are missing some piece of the puzzle.

 

Armchair CEO syndrome. It's human nature. Lotsa experts with a) the benefit of hindsight; and b) without having all the inputs that went into the decision; leading to c) people acting as though they are breaking from running their own $50 billion company to provide executive leadership training on how Jack Tramiel should have done his job.

 

We've all done it. I'm certainly guilty.

 

It's amazing they shipped the Jaguar.

 

Like astounding! They kept the whole thing running with what - under 200 people?

 

And while they made mistakes with Jaguar, I think it's often over-looked by Atarians that they also tried hard to fix a lot of long time mistakes. I hardly ever saw an ad on TV or in print for the 7800 or XE. I saw lots for Jaguar. When I had trouble with Scrapyard Dog on the 7800, there was no one I could call. Atari had a tip line and tip book for Jaguar. The 7800 had less than 10 third party games. Atari had lined up a bunch of third party titles for Jaguar ... maybe even more than the 5200 ... certainly more than 7800 or Lynx. They licensed big titles. They came out with additional peripherals. When I wanted to order something for the 7800, it was a pain ... long distance calls, talking to different people, items on the list that weren't available, no refunds etc. With Jaguar, 1-800-GO-Atari. Done. I saw Jaguar kiosks in stores ... never saw them for earlier systems. I had Jaguar SWAG. didn't see it for earlier systems.

 

 

In short: they focused.

[kskunk]

I disagree with you on the "they didn't have the money" panacea though - that's an extremely lazy conclusion in some respects.

I was using a broad brush to try to keep it simple: But what I really mean is that money was at the root of their decision process since they are a business, not a charity or religion. (Of course, some of us treat them like a religion.)

 

The business people who were there, complain about the lack of marketing funds and backing off on big investments and being unwilling to accept risk in retailer contracts. The developers who were there, complain about lousy tools and major bugs and poor documentation and late or nonexistent libraries. All of these are related to insufficient money -- or staff, which is just another way of saying money!

 

I enjoy the conversation, just look at my posting history! But I try to put some reality into the conversation, because I'm an engineer. I, too, have worked for an underfunded/understaffed company that somehow got a product on shelves. So I feel compelled to explain Atari's decisions. I know first hand how limited the technology was, and how expensive it is to manufacture complex machines for retail.

 

But what really compels me to keep posting is knowing how it feels to engineer a product when you only have a few engineers, no money to hire, and management is screaming "now or never" because they know they have to fire more people if you're another month late, or shut down if you miss Christmas. You have this beautiful design, but you have to cut so many corners you end up with a monster.

 

I don't believe the "hindsight" here is anything but an illusion. Most of what is suggested was probably painfully clear to them at the time. But somehow "hindsight" gives us the license to ignore the tradeoffs we don't like. Back in the real world, they had to make tough compromises or they wouldn't have shipped at all. They were cutting every corner they could and it shows - and even then they were so late they almost didn't make it. The Jaguar shipped a year late and the JagCD shipped almost 2 years late. Imagine being a year late and strolling down to Jack's office to say, 'Yeah, I wanna delay a few more months to fix a few bugs/write a better 3D library/change the design/add some features/waiting for the JagCD to be ready...'

 

- KS

Edited January 5, 2012 by kskunk

[Zerosquare]

The business people who were there, complain about the lack of marketing funds and backing off on big investments and being unwilling to accept risk in retailer contracts. The developers who were there, complain about lousy tools and major bugs and poor documentation and late or nonexistent libraries. All of these are related to insufficient money

Or bad/incompetent management.

[kskunk]

Or bad/incompetent management.

That too. I'm uncertain how I feel about this, because I don't think competent management would try to launch a console in such a competitive market with so little money. On the other hand, I'm glad we have a Jaguar. On a third hand, Atari's market capitalization was three times higher when Atari shut down in 1996 than before the Jaguar was launched in 1993. Some people think that's the best way to measure the performance of a public company's management team, not how their employees or fans feel about them. But on a fourth hand, maybe there was something other than the Jaguar to launch that could have kept them alive. (This is the point where the options become too unlimited, and I get lost in the wilderness!)

 

- KS

Edited January 5, 2012 by kskunk

[DracIsBack]

Or bad/incompetent management.

 

 

Did you read what he said? To me, that's one factor of many, many, many.

 

Lotsa armchair CEOing in this thread.

Edited January 5, 2012 by DracIsBack

[sheath]

If you want to get into why either system failed on the market, that's a separate issue then the technical performance/programming stuff though. (the tech issues had some impact, as did the cost/performance of the hardware, but it was more up to other problems like miss-matched market models making the 3DO far more expensive than it could have been -and added hardware cost for non-gaming specific features like the excessive amount of framebuffer space to support high-res 24-bit still images- and the deluxe form-factor of the early models . . . and then Atari's whole lack of funding/PR/management/staff/stability at the time)

 

That is an interesting quote by Kskunk about the 3DO. Crash 'N Burn has what I would call very minimal physics and AI, and a not so steady framerate. Road Rash and Need for Speed don't fare much better in the AI department either, but they do have solid framerates and great draw distance. Star Fighter is unparalleled tough. The 3DO's texture mapping is certainly impressive though. The online spec sheets also put the 3DO's polygon performance at roughly twice that of the Jaguar.

[mtshark7]

Even tho both Jaguar and 3DO are one of my favorite systems to play, In the end I'd say the 3DO wins.

[JagChris]

I don't really get involved in politics but I have heard a lot about some guy called Thunderbird who is apparently now an actual politician or trying to become one anyway.

 

Where did you hear this?

[16BitMan]

I don't really get involved in politics but I have heard a lot about some guy called Thunderbird who is apparently now an actual politician or trying to become one anyway.

 

Where did you hear this?

 

Somebody was talking about it on one of the Sega forums, can't remember which one I will have to look. There was a thread talking about the Jaguar and the subject of his (I think) game Battlesphere was brought up and somebody said he had given up coding and was involved in politics now. Maybe it was just a joke or something, I don't know the community that well really so don't have much of an idea who he is or this Gorf guy that everyone seems to constantly talk about (I am guessing he made Gorf for the Jaguar?)

[JagChris]

It would be interesting to know who said this. I dont know if it is true or not. Thunderbird has disappeared from the community.

 

 

I don't really get involved in politics but I have heard a lot about some guy called Thunderbird who is apparently now an actual politician or trying to become one anyway.

 

Where did you hear this?

 

Somebody was talking about it on one of the Sega forums, can't remember which one I will have to look. There was a thread talking about the Jaguar and the subject of his (I think) game Battlesphere was brought up and somebody said he had given up coding and was involved in politics now. Maybe it was just a joke or something, I don't know the community that well really so don't have much of an idea who he is or this Gorf guy that everyone seems to constantly talk about (I am guessing he made Gorf for the Jaguar?)

Edited January 7, 2012 by JagChris

[philipj]

If you want to get into why either system failed on the market, that's a separate issue then the technical performance/programming stuff though. (the tech issues had some impact, as did the cost/performance of the hardware, but it was more up to other problems like miss-matched market models making the 3DO far more expensive than it could have been -and added hardware cost for non-gaming specific features like the excessive amount of framebuffer space to support high-res 24-bit still images- and the deluxe form-factor of the early models . . . and then Atari's whole lack of funding/PR/management/staff/stability at the time)

 

That is an interesting quote by Kskunk about the 3DO. Crash 'N Burn has what I would call very minimal physics and AI, and a not so steady framerate. Road Rash and Need for Speed don't fare much better in the AI department either, but they do have solid framerates and great draw distance. Star Fighter is unparalleled tough. The 3DO's texture mapping is certainly impressive though. The online spec sheets also put the 3DO's polygon performance at roughly twice that of the Jaguar.

Even tho both Jaguar and 3DO are one of my favorite systems to play, In the end I'd say the 3DO wins.

 

Starfighter graphically them most impressive thing I'd ever seen until I got my hands on a Playstation 1. I learned that Starfighter was originally created for the "Acorn PC" which sported an ARM chip similar to what the 3DO used so it's no wonder the game was so impressive considering that the 3DO could run circles around the Acorn. I didn't even know what an Acorn computer was until I bump into some footage of it in action on Youtube.

 

Acorn Version

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8yLRZExpJM

 

3DO Version

[kool kitty89]

Its a good read but 41 pages of people repeating themselves. Kind of like this topic.

Every time I hear a "why didn't they...", I wish I could point them to the "Why didn't Atari..." FAQ. I just don't want to write it.

 

Normally, posters are missing some piece of the puzzle. The posts seem so repetitive because the same "obvious" solutions come up depending on which piece they overlook: Maybe they're fuzzy on the costs and limits of technology of the day, or unaware of the business and marketing challenges faced, or forget Atari's assets (debts) and reputation (notoriety).

Yes, and I learned a lot from those discussions (it wasn't just repeating the same things either . . . I got real answers/explanations for my comments/arguments, and a generally better understanding of things -mostly on the tech end, but also some of the business end)

 

The answer to every question is ultimately "they didn't have the money", and yet we hardly ever talk about retailer margins and NRE charges and licensing fees and cost of credit for a company in Atari's position. Instead we wonder why Atari didn't "try harder" to attract AAA partners in 1993.. the same year they notoriously avoided bankruptcy by not paying their business partners.

I agree with this, but only from the 1993 context . . . they had neither the liquid assets nor the credit to really drive a mass market product at the time. (not to mention shaky management and lack of many non-liquid assets as well -various staff andinfrastructure . . . and brand recognition/PR on top of that -in the industry and for consumers)

 

However, the bigger answer is to what got them in that terrible position in the first place, and that would (basically) be:

Atari Corp made serious mistakes from 1989 onward that led directly to their decline. (earlier on, there were also some more modest mistakes made by Atari Corp -balanced by good management in other areas, and some luck- and bad luck coinciding with things like the DRAM crisis in 1988 crippling the ST -especially since Atari was hit harder than CBM and had a primarily low-cost oriented product rage -unlike many orthodox mainstream desktop PC companies and Apple, though the likes of like Tandy were probably hurting more too)

 

Nevertheless 1988/89 was the turning point for Atari Corp. They were at their peak, and (with the right management) they had the potential to continue growing/expanding in either consoles or computers (or both), but that didn't happen for a number of reasons. (some of which have become more clear thanks to historians like Curt and Marty, and some new information is still coming out thanks to them)

In 1988 (and possibly through 1989), Atari had the 2nd highest market share of all game consoles in the US . . . a distant second to Nintendo by that point, but still substantially ahead of Sega (at more than double the market of the Master System in 1988 -and over 1 million 7800s sold that year and another >1M the previous year) And their position was strong enough to induce Sega to approach Atari corp for distribution of the Megadrive in 1988. (a deal that fell through due to disagreements over investment cost and conflicts of interest over the European market -the offer was for North America only, plus Atari had their in-house next-gen console projects to distract them too -and even with their modest resources and limited staff, under Jack Tramiel and Mike Katz, Atari Corp had proved muchmore effective than Sega's US division -which was far better funded and had superior hardware and software by a wide margin, albeit also higher prices and a weaker brand name)

 

 

And then there's the whole other discussion about Atari Inc, of course. (even more lost potential than Atari Corp by a wide margin . . . talk about what-ifs: what if Warner had installed properly skilled/suited management for the consumer products/entertainment -let alone electronics- market and not screwed things up with conflicting dual-management -and even later on, with all the problems experienced by 1984, there was tons of potential in what James Morgan was working on for Atari/NATCO)

 

It's amazing they shipped the Jaguar. Better funded companies have failed to get cheaper products out the door. Atari was in shambles - they'd been profitable on revenue of $258M in 91, by 93 they lost $78M on revenue of $29M. Nearly everyone had been fired except for some lawyers fighting Sega, gone were all the factories and every building but one. Somehow, with a handful of engineers against the competitions' thousands, with no money in the bank and no factories and no retailer help, Atari got the thing on shelves.

 

It's amazing they sold enough decent games that we're still here yakking about them. It's amazing they recovered the company's stock price and cash reserves enough to exit the industry while paying off investors, instead of leaving everybody broke.

Yes, there's some things they might have done better in hindsight (CD and/or design tweaks and/or more emhpasis on good SDKs . . . or more emphasis on Europe -the only market they had a remote chance in), but knowing their overall situation at the time, they still got pretty lucky to manage even what they did. (and that the Jaguar is relatively well-known . . . especially compared to the 7800 -which sold about 16 the more units in the US alone by 1990 than there were total Jaguars manufactured)

 

 

The only thing they could have done more by 1993 was have the Tramiels risk a huge chunk of their private funds in investments for Atari. (a massive risk with only moderate incentive for them to do -they already had a tidy amount of private funds and liquidating Atari would have been far more attractive than taking on that sort of risk -had it not been for the pending litigation and settlements, they probably would have scrapped the Jaguar altogether)

 

 

 

 

Or bad/incompetent management.

That too. I'm uncertain how I feel about this, because I don't think competent management would try to launch a console in such a competitive market with so little money. On the other hand, I'm glad we have a Jaguar. On a third hand, Atari's market capitalization was three times higher when Atari shut down in 1996 than before the Jaguar was launched in 1993. Some people think that's the best way to measure the performance of a public company's management team, not how their employees or fans feel about them. But on a fourth hand, maybe there was something other than the Jaguar to launch that could have kept them alive. (This is the point where the options become too unlimited, and I get lost in the wilderness!)

 

- KS

Again, the bigger thing on the "incompetent management" issue would be looking back to what led to the horrible position in 1993. (compared to the relatively strong company that Atari Corp was in 1988 -totally out of Warner's debt, profitable, having the dominant 16-bit computer platform in Europe, a substantial niche in the US game console market with the 7800 and 2600 Jr as well as a niche with the ST -less so with the A8 . . . there were notable misakes/issues from 1984-1988 too, but the real issue was the dramatic shift following 1989 that resulted in stagnation and decline in the console and computer markets -and struggling to establish the lynx on the market-)

 

The fact that Jack Tramiel retired in late 1988 (and had already been shifting over responsibilities to Sam during that year) combined with Mike Katz leaving in early 1989 make a fair argument for how important their leadership had been up to that point. (and Katz obviously had a substantial impact on Sega after he joined in late 1989 -especially with the software development, celebrity licenses, publisher relationships, and marketing campaigns he set up in his time there -Kalinske gets more credit, but Katz really laid the ground work for the Genesis's success in the North America -I'd even argue that, had Katz stayed, Sega may have been more stable than they ended up -Kalinske seems to have been more fast and loose with spending without reasonable limits in some cases, Katz seems to have recognized the need for competitive investments but also was more conservative -and had the experience of working at Atari Corp at very hard times, working hard toward making the best of very limited resources)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe in 10-15 years people will play what-if's on info about PS2 or PS3 that mirror some of the what-if's the original engineers went through in design.

Actually, there have already been some similar PS2/PS3 discussions on Sega-16 (some of which I've been involved with ). Like arguments over the design of the PS2, cost effectiveness, and why it was "hard" to program for. (inherent architectural issues, simply being "different" from PC/market standards, and/or lack of good development tools out of the box)

The N64, Dreamcast, GC, Xbox, and Saturn have come up too. (and many other older consoles -and several long-winded discussions on home computers, especially from the 8/16-bit generations -including issues of why certain platforms performed poorly in Europe and the US for different reasons -more so for pricing/marketing/business/management/software than hardware discussions in that case though)

 

PS3 hasn't so much . . . other than arguing whether the price was the reason it struggled on the market initially. (some seem to be adamant that the main factor was the 360 having a head start -which I don't agree with at all )

[sd32]

Star Fighter for the Acorn looks very fun, its so fast and furious compared to the 3DO game. Sure, it has no texture mapping and less polygons, but i like its looks. Actually, it would have been cool if someone had ported the Acorn version of Star Fighter to the Jag. Maybe it would have been just as fast and smooth, but goraud instead of flat shadded and with some cool blitter effects and a bit of texture mapping here and there. It would look pretty awesome.

Anyway, what happended to all of the 3D Stooges projects?, was everything cancelled. I was really looking forward to Gorf 3D and Legion Force Jidai. Would be cool if we could at least get some media from them. Gorf used to brag a lot about how much they could get out of the Jag hardware, i had a lot of hope in them.

Does anyone know where i can get some info on the capabilities of the 3DO DSP, math co-cpu, and the 2 25 mhz video processors, i have never been able to find info on them, at least not stuff that i regular guy can understand, hehe,

Edited January 7, 2012 by sd32

[JagChris]

If you want to get into why either system failed on the market, that's a separate issue then the technical performance/programming stuff though. (the tech issues had some impact, as did the cost/performance of the hardware, but it was more up to other problems like miss-matched market models making the 3DO far more expensive than it could have been -and added hardware cost for non-gaming specific features like the excessive amount of framebuffer space to support high-res 24-bit still images- and the deluxe form-factor of the early models . . . and then Atari's whole lack of funding/PR/management/staff/stability at the time)

That is an interesting quote by Kskunk about the 3DO. Crash 'N Burn has what I would call very minimal physics and AI, and a not so steady framerate. Road Rash and Need for Speed don't fare much better in the AI department either, but they do have solid framerates and great draw distance. Star Fighter is unparalleled tough. The 3DO's texture mapping is certainly impressive though. The online spec sheets also put the 3DO's polygon performance at roughly twice that of the Jaguar.

Even tho both Jaguar and 3DO are one of my favorite systems to play, In the end I'd say the 3DO wins.

Starfighter graphically them most impressive thing I'd ever seen until I got my hands on a Playstation 1. I learned that Starfighter was originally created for the "Acorn PC" which sported an ARM chip similar to what the 3DO used so it's no wonder the game was so impressive considering that the 3DO could run circles around the Acorn. I didn't even know what an Acorn computer was until I bump into some footage of it in action on Youtube.

 

Either one of these is better than any shooter the Jaguar has available for it, except perhaps SoulStar.

[Austin]

Star Fighter for the Acorn looks very fun, its so fast and furious compared to the 3DO game. Sure, it has no texture mapping and less polygons, but i like its looks.

 

I was going to say something about that, too. The Acorn version seems to run smoother than the 3DO version, which can get pretty choppy and slow at times when things get hectic on-screen (in typical 3DO fashion of course).

 

Does anyone know where i can get some info on the capabilities of the 3DO DSP, math co-cpu, and the 2 25 mhz video processors, i have never been able to find info on them, at least not stuff that i regular guy can understand, hehe,

 

I would try a 3DO forum. I know there are some knowledgeable folks over at 3do.cdinteractive.co.uk.

[philipj]

Star Fighter for the Acorn looks very fun, its so fast and furious compared to the 3DO game. Sure, it has no texture mapping and less polygons, but i like its looks. Actually, it would have been cool if someone had ported the Acorn version of Star Fighter to the Jag. Maybe it would have been just as fast and smooth, but goraud instead of flat shadded and with some cool blitter effects and a bit of texture mapping here and there. It would look pretty awesome.

Anyway, what happended to all of the 3D Stooges projects?, was everything cancelled. I was really looking forward to Gorf 3D and Legion Force Jidai. Would be cool if we could at least get some media from them. Gorf used to brag a lot about how much they could get out of the Jag hardware, i had a lot of hope in them.

Does anyone know where i can get some info on the capabilities of the 3DO DSP, math co-cpu, and the 2 25 mhz video processors, i have never been able to find info on them, at least not stuff that i regular guy can understand, hehe,

 

I found the pdf for the 3DO video chip... I couldn't find anything other than a gif image on the 3DO DSP. I can't find any documentation on it. There's a forum that has a link to download the official 3DO documents around here somewhere.

 

If you want to get into why either system failed on the market, that's a separate issue then the technical performance/programming stuff though. (the tech issues had some impact, as did the cost/performance of the hardware, but it was more up to other problems like miss-matched market models making the 3DO far more expensive than it could have been -and added hardware cost for non-gaming specific features like the excessive amount of framebuffer space to support high-res 24-bit still images- and the deluxe form-factor of the early models . . . and then Atari's whole lack of funding/PR/management/staff/stability at the time)

That is an interesting quote by Kskunk about the 3DO. Crash 'N Burn has what I would call very minimal physics and AI, and a not so steady framerate. Road Rash and Need for Speed don't fare much better in the AI department either, but they do have solid framerates and great draw distance. Star Fighter is unparalleled tough. The 3DO's texture mapping is certainly impressive though. The online spec sheets also put the 3DO's polygon performance at roughly twice that of the Jaguar.

Even tho both Jaguar and 3DO are one of my favorite systems to play, In the end I'd say the 3DO wins.

Starfighter graphically them most impressive thing I'd ever seen until I got my hands on a Playstation 1. I learned that Starfighter was originally created for the "Acorn PC" which sported an ARM chip similar to what the 3DO used so it's no wonder the game was so impressive considering that the 3DO could run circles around the Acorn. I didn't even know what an Acorn computer was until I bump into some footage of it in action on Youtube.

 

Either one of these is better than any shooter the Jaguar has available for it, except perhaps SoulStar.

 

You're right about that except for the Duranic demo by native... That game showed promise on the 2D front.

Ds3925 (3DO Video Chip).pdf

Edited January 7, 2012 by philipj

[+remowilliams]

Anyway, what happended to all of the 3D Stooges projects?, was everything cancelled.

 

http://www.atariage....ost__p__2437161

[Crazyace]

The starfighter A7000 comment was compared to how it looks on the older A3010 ( The A7000 came out in 1995 - after the Jaguar )

 

Regarding the 2D comparision SuperBurnout is really nice on the Jaguar - but dont think that Outrun is really stretching the Saturn technically. You might want to compare PowerDrift - as that is slightly more technical - or trying looking at StreetRacer's saturn version compared to Atari Karts.

 

Anyway my comment wasn't really about Starfighter - just the capabilities of each machine. ( I think Capture the flag and Rescue on Fractalus showed the power of the 8bit way way before Yoomp etc )

[+Stephen]

I don't really get involved in politics but I have heard a lot about some guy called Thunderbird who is apparently now an actual politician or trying to become one anyway.

 

Where did you hear this?

 

Somebody was talking about it on one of the Sega forums, can't remember which one I will have to look. There was a thread talking about the Jaguar and the subject of his (I think) game Battlesphere was brought up and somebody said he had given up coding and was involved in politics now. Maybe it was just a joke or something, I don't know the community that well really so don't have much of an idea who he is or this Gorf guy that everyone seems to constantly talk about (I am guessing he made Gorf for the Jaguar?)

Thunderbird was Douglas Engel's handle. He did the networking and music playback routines for Battlesphere.

 

Gorf (I believe Steve Scavone was his name) did the excellent Gorf port for the Jag.

[JagChris]

If you have never played Battle Sphere you are missing

out on what REAL AI does for a game.

 

I'll second that, it's true BattleSphere has VERY impressive & fierce AI. I can't even complete the 20 training missions and I play at least 4 times a week for hours. It changes it's tactics to defend your playing style and LEARNS to overcome everything you attempt to do to clear the targets. This forces you to think and come up with new and different strategies to simply stay alive much less go on the offensive. The AI in the enemy ships will hunt you down like an animal and kill you with a shot to the back of the head - and you may not even see it happening on the radar. This really makes the game come alive and takes some serious dedication and thought to compete.

 

Reading stuff like this makes me sad I'll never own Battlesphere. Or that Scatologic won't develope anything else for the Jaguar. Thunderbird told me at one time with what they knew now (before the GPU in main workaround was found) they could double the performance of the Jag from what is seen in Battlesphere Gold. This whole situation is a damn shame.

[kool kitty89]

Star Fighter for the Acorn looks very fun, its so fast and furious compared to the 3DO game. Sure, it has no texture mapping and less polygons, but i like its looks. Actually, it would have been cool if someone had ported the Acorn version of Star Fighter to the Jag. Maybe it would have been just as fast and smooth, but goraud instead of flat shadded and with some cool blitter effects and a bit of texture mapping here and there. It would look pretty awesome.

Anyway, what happended to all of the 3D Stooges projects?, was everything cancelled. I was really looking forward to Gorf 3D and Legion Force Jidai. Would be cool if we could at least get some media from them. Gorf used to brag a lot about how much they could get out of the Jag hardware, i had a lot of hope in them.

Does anyone know where i can get some info on the capabilities of the 3DO DSP, math co-cpu, and the 2 25 mhz video processors, i have never been able to find info on them, at least not stuff that i regular guy can understand, hehe,

I think part of that is the actual gameplay videos being shown (ie the 3DO example isn't showing all the action), but I think the difficulty level may be higher by default on the Acorn version too.

 

The Acorn version also does have quite a bit of texture mapping, but a mix of untextured surfaces too and limited to 256 colors (more limited colorspace too iirc, but I forget the specifics -might be 3-3-2 RGB in that mode), and the limited color of the Archimedes is certainly noticeable. (and the lack of alpha blending effects)

[philipj]

Star Fighter for the Acorn looks very fun, its so fast and furious compared to the 3DO game. Sure, it has no texture mapping and less polygons, but i like its looks. Actually, it would have been cool if someone had ported the Acorn version of Star Fighter to the Jag. Maybe it would have been just as fast and smooth, but goraud instead of flat shadded and with some cool blitter effects and a bit of texture mapping here and there. It would look pretty awesome.

Anyway, what happended to all of the 3D Stooges projects?, was everything cancelled. I was really looking forward to Gorf 3D and Legion Force Jidai. Would be cool if we could at least get some media from them. Gorf used to brag a lot about how much they could get out of the Jag hardware, i had a lot of hope in them.

Does anyone know where i can get some info on the capabilities of the 3DO DSP, math co-cpu, and the 2 25 mhz video processors, i have never been able to find info on them, at least not stuff that i regular guy can understand, hehe,

I think part of that is the actual gameplay videos being shown (ie the 3DO example isn't showing all the action), but I think the difficulty level may be higher by default on the Acorn version too.

 

The Acorn version also does have quite a bit of texture mapping, but a mix of untextured surfaces too and limited to 256 colors (more limited colorspace too iirc, but I forget the specifics -might be 3-3-2 RGB in that mode), and the limited color of the Archimedes is certainly noticeable. (and the lack of alpha blending effects)

 

I think the texture mapping for the Acorn is obviously smaller then the ones used on the 3DO version and not as detailed... It's still very impressive stuff considering the time in which the games was released. I always thought it was a 3DO exclusive until I saw the YouTube footage.

[Crazyace]

What do you mean by a pixel scene generator?

[philipj]

Whatever he means, he's right about the Jags 2D capabilities. It's very much possible for the Jag to use 2D methods as a way to leverage for rendering 3D scenes without using a lot of memory to do so. The traditional polygon method is very clunky at best especially when you're talking about texture mapping. For example If you was to use a voxel engine on the Jag, I think the move to make is to make the voxel engine smarter by tricking the Jag to do more sophisticated 3D. Of course I've been working on a project of my own in that regard so I could go on and on about that sort of topic. Bottom line... 2.5D is the future for the Jags 3D capabilities.

[GroovyBee]

You mean a Z-Buffer? What does the perspective (and subsequent interpolation of the texture) and rotation of objects in the scene?