Atari v Commodore

[frenchman]

 

 

ROFL you really are funny. Games have sprites, oh wait not on the A8 obviously, your games are all static screens lol The A8 HAS hardware sprites they're called PMGS they're just useless comapred to the C64 ones, so in most cases software sprites are used instead BUT your superior CPU isn't superior enough to draw as many of them as the C64 can in hadrware. You're the one trying to say the A8 is better, all you seem able to do is prove yourself wrong by agreeing with me when I point out anything lacking in it's hardware. Maybe you just don't understand what I'm talking about. I think it's you who needs to learn what the A8 can do and YOU prove what the A8 can do compared to the C64.

 

Pete

 

Roll around on the floor all you like, at least I am funny, but you're just talking pure garbage. First you say A8 has NO hardware sprites, now you say A8 does? Make up your mind. Do you actually realise how STUPID you make yourself sound? And you're asking if you are being understood? You keep changing your mind from post to post. Obviously you know nothing about the A8, you probably read some stuff on Wikipedia, start posting here and that's that. Best for you to keep quiet.

Edited September 2, 2009 by frenchman

[Heaven/TQA]

If you use all these features on an Atari game, you have a clearly winner. For example:

 

[scratches head] Well, i haven't seen that moving so it's incredibly hard to tell from a still image what it actually moves like and i'd like to know more about what's going on before i'd even consider calling it a winner. i'm not even going to risk a relatively educated guess as to how the sprites work without more information in fact! =-)

 

and it's only 64K example with 27 colors in action. Imagine what more it could be with a 128K version.

 

Actually, i must admit you've got me there because i can't imagine any way that having extra memory will improve how many colours are in play... the splits can't change unless the graphics do.

 

they move in 50 fps but to be honest... this would be possible on c64, too.... clever multiplexor and here you go...

 

but the prototype of that shooter is a nice proove of concept for having dlis and moving data around while scrolling antic 4...

[AtariNerd]

 

 

ROFL you really are funny. Games have sprites, oh wait not on the A8 obviously, your games are all static screens lol The A8 HAS hardware sprites they're called PMGS they're just useless comapred to the C64 ones, so in most cases software sprites are used instead BUT your superior CPU isn't superior enough to draw as many of them as the C64 can in hadrware. You're the one trying to say the A8 is better, all you seem able to do is prove yourself wrong by agreeing with me when I point out anything lacking in it's hardware. Maybe you just don't understand what I'm talking about. I think it's you who needs to learn what the A8 can do and YOU prove what the A8 can do compared to the C64.

 

Pete

 

Just show us the code...we'll see if you know what you're talking about. Why keep it so close to your heart, unshared? Even if you think it "unfinished" , why not let us see the work in progress you've taken such effort to create? Dazzle us with your efforts..surely that is the best way to prove you know of what you speak and silence your critics. Except that it needs to be code of a goodly sort, doesn't it, not a sloppy effort to best provide such proof? (We can talk about ways to improve it..give some helpful-like advice, we swear)

 

Just show us the code.....prove your genius or just concede the 'con' and run away. You've really asked for all the criticism you've gotten from the attitude you've presented here. Remember which house you are in.

 

You've claimed you can create an effort that looks every bit as good as the C64 version. I want to see it...(errrr. please...with sugar..)

Edited September 2, 2009 by AtariNerd

[emkay]

ROFL you really are funny. Games have sprites, oh wait not on the A8 obviously, your games are all static screens lol The A8 HAS hardware sprites they're called PMGS they're just useless comapred to the C64 ones,...

 

 

To keep the facts in the right order:

 

Sprites is a term, built by Commodore. Useful to have moving objects on the sceen with a slow CPU.

The C64's sprites are some kind of "enhanced/changed" feature of the A8: A stolen idea with optimised features for the early 80s.

And, computers with a fast CPU don't need sprites at all.

The right term is, that the C64 has Player Missile Graphics. But the A8 has no hardware Sprites.

The main difference is that the PMg is thought as a screen overlay, while the sprites were optimised to be handled as free moving objects.

It's the same with DLIs . C64 guys often name the DLI's Rasters.

All I can say is "ouch"....

[analmux]

The main difference is that the PMg is thought as a screen overlay, while the sprites were optimised to be handled as free moving objects.

 

Exactly. In a sense our PMG on A8 is partially a software sprite, as we need to shift data for vertical movements. The most economical usage of PMG is using the grafpn registers instead of the DMA modes. The scrolling MCS demo (for PMG underlays) makes use of direct shape programming instead of DMA. Then no data needs to be shifted, only directly programmed at the correct timing. Though DLI is enough for that.

[analmux]

 

 

ROFL you really are funny. Games have sprites, oh wait not on the A8 obviously, your games are all static screens lol The A8 HAS hardware sprites they're called PMGS they're just useless comapred to the C64 ones, so in most cases software sprites are used instead BUT your superior CPU isn't superior enough to draw as many of them as the C64 can in hadrware. You're the one trying to say the A8 is better, all you seem able to do is prove yourself wrong by agreeing with me when I point out anything lacking in it's hardware. Maybe you just don't understand what I'm talking about. I think it's you who needs to learn what the A8 can do and YOU prove what the A8 can do compared to the C64.

 

Pete

 

Just show us the code...we'll see if you know what you're talking about. Why keep it so close to your heart, unshared? Even if you think it "unfinished" , why not let us see the work in progress you've taken such effort to create? Dazzle us with your efforts..surely that is the best way to prove you know of what you speak and silence your critics. Except that it needs to be code of a goodly sort, doesn't it, not a sloppy effort to best provide such proof? (We can talk about ways to improve it..give some helpful-like advice, we swear)

 

Just show us the code.....prove your genius or just concede the 'con' and run away. You've really asked for all the criticism you've gotten from the attitude you've presented here. Remember which house you are in.

 

You've claimed you can create an effort that looks every bit as good as the C64 version. I want to see it...(errrr. please...with sugar..)

 

Come on. PeteD hasn't misbehaved in any way comparable to f.e. Oswald. I'd like to say PeteD I encourage you to go on. I think it's a good development when a C64 scener comes to A8 world for putting energy into a conversion.

[analmux]

And as i said the last time you dragged this out, if person X says "this cannot be done" your analogy crashes, burns and fails utterly if no person Y steps forward to say "I've just done it". Someone has to take Crane's role and disprove the nay-sayers, without that it doesn't prove anything at all, least of all that you're in some way right.

No one has to do anything. It's a personal choice which logic one likes to use. If you choose to use the logic of "if no one shows this is possible, it ISN'T possible", then that's your choice. But you don't decide what logic another one should use. That's the whole problem here.

 

Apart from that, I think we should make a difference between features which are (indeed) really impossible for A8 (like f.e. 64 * (24*21) freely moving sprites on a complex background at 50Hz), and features which are in some kind of 'twilight' zone, where it isn't easy to say if something is possible or not. The claims in the 'twilight' zone should not be 'true' or 'false' but rather 'undecided'. The fact that some C64 people come here and say 'false' even if it should be 'undecided' is their choice, and one should not be surprised if others disagree.

 

 

If you use all these features on an Atari game, you have a clearly winner. For example:

...Well, i haven't seen that moving...

It moves, there's a download available somewhere. It scrolls vertically + a bit horizontally....and, the stuff is moving.

 

 

...What annoys me is when A8 fans refuse point blank to admit that they aren't ALWAYS right and create stupid "rules" for arguing about which machine is the best...

Well, the A8'ies are not the only ones. A C64-guy named Rockford comes here to 'decide' which prog examples count as proof of A8 strength and which not. That reminds me of kids play. When someone can't stand loosing, one just changes the rules.

 

 

...The Atari hardware is best at "vertical" color manipulation. The DLIs are great, and the sprites can be "cut" and reused further down the screen. Unfortunately this isn't a very flexible design for games that aren't designed around these hardware limitations...

Well, I think Rampage on A8 is a nice example of how PMG can be multiplexed, and not get into conflict.

[Heaven/TQA]

aehm.... I would not vote for Rampage A8 as "nice multiplexor" example on A8...

[PeteD]

 

 

ROFL you really are funny. Games have sprites, oh wait not on the A8 obviously, your games are all static screens lol The A8 HAS hardware sprites they're called PMGS they're just useless comapred to the C64 ones, so in most cases software sprites are used instead BUT your superior CPU isn't superior enough to draw as many of them as the C64 can in hadrware. You're the one trying to say the A8 is better, all you seem able to do is prove yourself wrong by agreeing with me when I point out anything lacking in it's hardware. Maybe you just don't understand what I'm talking about. I think it's you who needs to learn what the A8 can do and YOU prove what the A8 can do compared to the C64.

 

Pete

 

Roll around on the floor all you like, at least I am funny, but you're just talking pure garbage. First you say A8 has NO hardware sprites, now you say A8 does? Make up your mind. Do you actually realise how STUPID you make yourself sound? And you're asking if you are being understood? You keep changing your mind from post to post. Obviously you know nothing about the A8, you probably read some stuff on Wikipedia, start posting here and that's that. Best for you to keep quiet.

 

All I'm trying to do is cater to your idiot terms when it comes to proving a point. If I say the A8 has hardware sprites people say no it hasn't it has PMGs so I lose there, if I say it hasn't someone will say "but what about the PMGs"? So either way I can't win. It's no wonder C64 people come here then end up causing massive rows in this thread again because as I've said you change the rules all the time to suit your own arguments. You just want me to keep quiet because 95% of the points I make against your arguments are correct so you have to spend ages nit picking to get your 1 brownie point for the day. Go ahead, I know what the running total is

 

Pete

[PeteD]

 

 

ROFL you really are funny. Games have sprites, oh wait not on the A8 obviously, your games are all static screens lol The A8 HAS hardware sprites they're called PMGS they're just useless comapred to the C64 ones, so in most cases software sprites are used instead BUT your superior CPU isn't superior enough to draw as many of them as the C64 can in hadrware. You're the one trying to say the A8 is better, all you seem able to do is prove yourself wrong by agreeing with me when I point out anything lacking in it's hardware. Maybe you just don't understand what I'm talking about. I think it's you who needs to learn what the A8 can do and YOU prove what the A8 can do compared to the C64.

 

Pete

 

Just show us the code...we'll see if you know what you're talking about. Why keep it so close to your heart, unshared? Even if you think it "unfinished" , why not let us see the work in progress you've taken such effort to create? Dazzle us with your efforts..surely that is the best way to prove you know of what you speak and silence your critics. Except that it needs to be code of a goodly sort, doesn't it, not a sloppy effort to best provide such proof? (We can talk about ways to improve it..give some helpful-like advice, we swear)

 

Just show us the code.....prove your genius or just concede the 'con' and run away. You've really asked for all the criticism you've gotten from the attitude you've presented here. Remember which house you are in.

 

You've claimed you can create an effort that looks every bit as good as the C64 version. I want to see it...(errrr. please...with sugar..)

 

You'll see it when it's done It doesn't matter to me what you think of it, if it's not being done to dazzle anyone, to make anyone think I'm a genius, any coder code do it. Telling me I'm a con man is offensive but I've come to expect nothing else from some people on here. I don't have an attitude, it's called debating a point. If I'd agreed 100% with everything the A8 guys said in this thread then I'd be the good guy I suppose? but as soon as someone disagrees the verbal attacks have to start, it happened when I joined, it happens every time I disagree. Please continue, it's amusing

 

 

Pete

[analmux]

aehm.... I would not vote for Rampage A8 as "nice multiplexor" example on A8...

 

OK OK. Of course we know nowadays there are very complex multiplexers (a guy named Heaven tried one )

But, at the time Rampage was written, maybe it was one of the few A8 games using such multiplexers.

 

Most of the other A8 games using multiplexers were limited to vertical regions, in which sprite objects are trapped.

[Lazarus]

Sprites is a term, built by Commodore. Useful to have moving objects on the sceen with a slow CPU.

No it isn't. Commodore called the VIC2 sprites "MOBs" (Moveable OBjects). The term "sprite" was coined by Texas Instruments and then it kept stuck. People and magazines started using that term.

 

The C64's sprites are some kind of "enhanced/changed" feature of the A8: A stolen idea with optimised features for the early 80s.

Atari did not invent sprites. They took the idea from Signetics.

 

And, computers with a fast CPU don't need sprites at all.

Yes, but 8 bit computers from the 70s/80s are no "computers with fast CPUs".

 

The right term is, that the C64 has Player Missile Graphics. But the A8 has no hardware Sprites.

PMG is a term invented by Atari for their sprite system, has nothing to do with Commodore or anything else.

 

The main difference is that the PMg is thought as a screen overlay, while the sprites were optimised to be handled as free moving objects.

As the name says: PMG is thought as "players" and "missiles" -> free moving objects too.

 

It's the same with DLIs . C64 guys often name the DLI's Rasters.

If there is no display list you definitely can't have display list interrupts.

 

All I can say is "ouch"....

Me too.

[PeteD]

ROFL you really are funny. Games have sprites, oh wait not on the A8 obviously, your games are all static screens lol The A8 HAS hardware sprites they're called PMGS they're just useless comapred to the C64 ones,...

 

 

To keep the facts in the right order:

 

Sprites is a term, built by Commodore. Useful to have moving objects on the sceen with a slow CPU.

The C64's sprites are some kind of "enhanced/changed" feature of the A8: A stolen idea with optimised features for the early 80s.

And, computers with a fast CPU don't need sprites at all.

The right term is, that the C64 has Player Missile Graphics. But the A8 has no hardware Sprites.

The main difference is that the PMg is thought as a screen overlay, while the sprites were optimised to be handled as free moving objects.

It's the same with DLIs . C64 guys often name the DLI's Rasters.

All I can say is "ouch"....

 

Sprite was NOT a term "built" by Commodore

Computers with a CPU not even double another one do need "sprites" or at least any coder would give a limb for them.

DLI's are quite nice but not in my experience as flexible as rasters, I'm having to use timer interrupts in Fist, not saying that's a bad thing, I used timers on the C64 I was just a bit discouraged when I realised the mighty DLI didn't do what I wanted.

 

 

Pete

[PeteD]

Really, I think some people lose the plot in threads like this. On one hand I've got someone basically telling me I'm an atari hater for no reason and on another I've got someone telling me that I'm lying when I say the A8 can do a C64 game as well as the C64 one and because I haven't proven it in the few weeks I've been registered here I'm a con man. I can look through this forum and see a slew of games not yet finished that have already taken 2+ years and I don't get a few months to do mine? Ok then Some people should take a chill pill.

 

 

 

Pete

[PeteD]

The main difference is that the PMg is thought as a screen overlay, while the sprites were optimised to be handled as free moving objects.

 

Exactly. In a sense our PMG on A8 is partially a software sprite, as we need to shift data for vertical movements. The most economical usage of PMG is using the grafpn registers instead of the DMA modes. The scrolling MCS demo (for PMG underlays) makes use of direct shape programming instead of DMA. Then no data needs to be shifted, only directly programmed at the correct timing. Though DLI is enough for that.

 

Is that using solid shapes? like turn off the dma fetch but you're limited to FF for like 16 lines then 00 etc I'm presuming there isn't a change to grafpn on every scanline so for something thats got different data on every line the dma method is still faster?

 

 

Pete

Edited September 2, 2009 by PeteD

[AtariNerd]

Sorry to be rude, as I rarely ever make this much of a fuss over anything, really. But you guys aren't having any form of discussion...just yelling at each other - which makes me a bit uptight and fighty. I don't particularly mind people slagging off other machines occasionally so much if it isn't an innate habit.

 

Actually, to put the record straight, I actually come from a Commodore background first and know that from a technical point of view the built-in hardware makes for easier conversions and new game creation from the get-go., particularly of the type of arcade games that were present around the time of the c64's heyday. The C64 was my primary gaming unit for a goodly number of years. What attracted me to the Atari community later on is more of a coder culture that existed before the time of the arcades mainstream, through the early gaming transition and the niche the likes of the C64 later occupied.

Edited September 2, 2009 by AtariNerd

[Heaven/TQA]

Sorry to be rude, as I rarely ever make this much of a fuss over anything, really. But you guys aren't having any form of discussion...just yelling at each other - which makes me a bit uptight and fighty. I don't particularly mind people slagging off other machines occasionally so much if it isn't an innate habit.

 

Actually, to put the record straight, I actually come from a Commodore background first and know that from a technical point of view the built-in hardware makes for easier conversions and new game creation from the get-go., particularly of the type of arcade games that were present around the time of the c64's heyday. The C64 was my primary gaming unit for a goodly number of years. What attracted me to the Atari community later on is more of a coder culture that existed before the time of the arcades mainstream, through the early gaming transition and the niche the likes of the C64 later occupied.

 

I think Pete is one of the less biased people here as he seems to touch the other side so respect from my side... same goes to TMR.... nobody cut me in pieces when I throwed easily Beyond Evil piece of code in less than few hours on c64... I have not returned to the c64 code as I don't want to taste the bitter sweet of having Beyond faster finished when using the c64 sprites...

[PeteD]

Just for information/disclosure's sake (as I'm supposedly "hiding" my code) Fist is waiting for me to finish my PC tool to build the backgrounds. I looked again at G2F and it isn't capable (as far as I can see) of doing what I need which is timer based mid charline screen splits. Until that is finished and spitting out data the only thing for someone to see is a 4 colour background with 1/2 the graphics missing and some "coder data" sprite drawings to test the sprite code.

 

 

Pete

[oky2000]

You can't say Sprites were stolen by Commodore from Atari

 

The C64 VIC-II chip wasn't even designed as a home computer, it was designed as an arcade chipset pure and simple, the fact it went into a home computer is neither here nor there and if any copying went on it isn't going to be from some lame hardware moveable objects from a 4 year old design. Jay Miner always designed systems with very weak 'sprites' the Amiga barely has better sprites than the C64 in the original chipset so I doubt very much the technical genius came from anywhere near Atari

 

Plus if they were stolen or modified from A8 hardware (doubtful) and the idea for them is not exclusive via a patent to Atari so there would have been a settlement in our out of court over it. Clearly the two are just similar effects achieved via quite different technical solutions.

[AtariNerd]

 

 

I think Pete is one of the less biased people here as he seems to touch the other side so respect from my side... same goes to TMR.... nobody cut me in pieces when I throwed easily Beyond Evil piece of code in less than few hours on c64... I have not returned to the c64 code as I don't want to taste the bitter sweet of having Beyond faster finished when using the c64 sprites...

 

 

That would be pretty strait-forward on the C64. I do think some folks underestimate how much manual effort it takes to create similar on the A 8bit (myself included to a great degree, apparently) There are only so many free cycles. Yet that is part of the attraction.

 

I do appreciate Pete's efforts, though I ignorantly didn't realize to what extent he was going to achieve what he was going for. I thought it was a matter of some straightforward per line DLI's, not the more complicated midline changes he's discussing. I still don't think the A8 can really pull it off as effectively in that manner, that it will probably suck up too many cycles to allow smooth character animations, etc, but certainly wouldn't mind being proved wrong.

 

My greatest respect and apologies to you Pete from a non-techy fool.

 

I still think you are rude, mind.

[Lazarus]

DLI's are quite nice but not in my experience as flexible as rasters, I'm having to use timer interrupts in Fist, not saying that's a bad thing, I used timers on the C64 I was just a bit discouraged when I realised the mighty DLI didn't do what I wanted.

I hope you are aware that by using timer IRQs on A8 your are losing sound channels? This is because the POKEY timers are also used as sound oscillators.

[PeteD]

DLI's are quite nice but not in my experience as flexible as rasters, I'm having to use timer interrupts in Fist, not saying that's a bad thing, I used timers on the C64 I was just a bit discouraged when I realised the mighty DLI didn't do what I wanted.

I hope you are aware that by using timer IRQs on A8 your are losing sound channels? This is because the POKEY timers are also used as sound oscillators.

 

Very aware that the timers are used for the pokey sounds too but I need to use a timer to get the result I require without wsyncing for lines at a time. I'm not yet sure of the consequences of what I'm doing as far as music goes I was going to worry about that later. afaik just using a 15khz timer to trigger an IRQ on a specific scanline wont totally break the channel I'm using and even if it does there are 3 more which still = the C64. I'll let one of the more knowledgable POKEY guys tell me what's really going on

 

 

Pete

[emkay]

Sprites is a term, built by Commodore. Useful to have moving objects on the sceen with a slow CPU.

No it isn't. Commodore called the VIC2 sprites "MOBs" (Moveable OBjects). The term "sprite" was coined by Texas Instruments and then it kept stuck. People and magazines started using that term.

 

The C64's sprites are some kind of "enhanced/changed" feature of the A8: A stolen idea with optimised features for the early 80s.

Atari did not invent sprites. They took the idea from Signetics.

No. It seems to be a coexistens there. Because GTIA used the "doubled" PM of the 2600's TIA, which is an upgrade to the Pong machines.

 

The developers of the ´"Sprites" for the VIC II stated that they took the ideas from the Atari machines.

 

 

 

And, computers with a fast CPU don't need sprites at all.

Yes, but 8 bit computers from the 70s/80s are no "computers with fast CPUs".

 

That depends on the usage.

 

The right term is, that the C64 has Player Missile Graphics. But the A8 has no hardware Sprites.

PMG is a term invented by Atari for their sprite system, has nothing to do with Commodore or anything else.

 

 

The main difference is that the PMg is thought as a screen overlay, while the sprites were optimised to be handled as free moving objects.

As the name says: PMG is thought as "players" and "missiles" -> free moving objects too.

 

TOO.... thats the add.

You can use it for moving object. But you also could do fullscreen graphics an let the background move.

 

 

It's the same with DLIs . C64 guys often name the DLI's Rasters.

If there is no display list you definitely can't have display list interrupts.

 

All I can say is "ouch"....

Me too.

 

 

Well, you brain seem to hurt very hard, doesn't it ?

 

You have to see the difference between Rasters and Display List Interrupts.

Rasters have to be programmed via the CPU.

DLIs get activated by ANTIC on every line it runs it's own program and the bit is set for the Interrupt to be activated. No further action here. Together with the WSYNC command it saves a lot of CPU cycles.

[PeteD]

Ok, just in case I'm missing something here because this is my understanding atm and if I'm wrong it'll save me all kinds of trouble. On a char screen the display list can only trigger a DLI at the start of every char line? so every 8 pixels in Y? If not then how do I cause a DLI on say the 10th scanline of my screen? If I'm right then imho the C64s raster interrupt method is a lot better than DLIs because you can place one wherever you want with a little effort (timing to account for badlines and sprites). And doesn't wsync stall the cpu until the end of the line is reached? That's kind of wasting cycles not saving them although it is a useful method for waiting for a certain position, thats not always the position you want.

 

 

Pete

[emkay]

 

Jay Miner always designed systems with very weak 'sprites' the Amiga barely has better sprites than the C64 in the original chipset so I doubt very much the technical genius came from anywhere near Atari

 

 

 

LOL?

 

The AMIGA has lightyear better "Sprites" than the C64. It simply has the "enhanced" capabilities of the A8's PMg AND it has a powerful Blitter Chip that would have made any hardware Sprite obsolete.