Commodore 64 vs Atari 800 Xl

[PeteD]

 

 

Display it's all about hardware. A certain computer will always have a certain type of display depending on it's hardware. All computers differs in display.

 

So, now for about the 1 millionth time, YOU PREFER the Atari 800, especially the pre-XL version. So WHY do you continue to post things like, the C64 can't do this? Firstly, technically in the case of Crownland you're wrong so the only way it's BETTER is because YOU PREFER it but you'll continue to antagonise people who don't agree with you. ho hum, I did say you wouldn't stop the other day and I was right.

 

 

Pete

[TMR]

At least we agree of one thing. These two games looks very different. I personally prefer Crownland by far for it's almost glasslike colours. So much cleaner.

 

How can an emulator-recorded video that isn't using an exact palette be "cleaner"? Surely only the real colours on the real machine can truly be "clean" otherwise the near matches from hardware like the CPC Plus would be valid.

Edited May 1, 2010 by TMR

[DimensionX]

Display it's all about hardware. A certain computer will always have a certain type of display depending on it's hardware. All computers differs in display.

 

So your definition of "Atari graphics" is basically something that only a finite number of Atari 8-bits can display... and none of the emulator screenshots you've posted represent them. Bit dim of you to keep posting all of those images then, wasn't it.

 

The reason that i prefer Atari, is for it's display. I like that display much better then the one that C64 produces. Then we can have a game of just 2 colours, it will still be the Atari display.

[DimensionX]

At least we agree of one thing. These two games looks very different. I personally prefer Crownland by far for it's almost glasslike colours. So much cleaner.

 

How can an emulator-recorded video that isn't using an exact palette be "cleaner"? Surely only the real colours on the real machine can truly be "clean" otherwise the near matches from hardware like the CPC Plus would be valid.

 

I have both seen and owned most of the computers myself to be able to tell the difference in display. All computers have their own unique way of diplay pixels on a screen, depending on what hardware they use.

[PeteD]

Display it's all about hardware. A certain computer will always have a certain type of display depending on it's hardware. All computers differs in display.

 

So your definition of "Atari graphics" is basically something that only a finite number of Atari 8-bits can display... and none of the emulator screenshots you've posted represent them. Bit dim of you to keep posting all of those images then, wasn't it.

 

The reason that i prefer Atari, is for it's display. I like that display much better then the one that C64 produces. Then we can have a game of just 2 colours, it will still be the Atari display.

 

Good, ok, as I say we've come to that conclusion AGAIN. Can we please stop posting C64 can't do (when you just mean I prefer the colours of X on the Atari) or "A8 is better" then?? Or at least put "imo" or something so we know you're not just taking the piss

 

 

Pete

[DimensionX]

 

 

Display it's all about hardware. A certain computer will always have a certain type of display depending on it's hardware. All computers differs in display.

 

So, now for about the 1 millionth time, YOU PREFER the Atari 800, especially the pre-XL version. So WHY do you continue to post things like, the C64 can't do this? Firstly, technically in the case of Crownland you're wrong so the only way it's BETTER is because YOU PREFER it but you'll continue to antagonise people who don't agree with you. ho hum, I did say you wouldn't stop the other day and I was right.

 

 

Pete

 

Because some people keeps posting annoying comments aimed at me. Else i wouldn't have done even one more posting in this thread. Knock it off, and you don't have to see me here anymore.

Edited May 1, 2010 by DimensionX

[PeteD]

At least we agree of one thing. These two games looks very different. I personally prefer Crownland by far for it's almost glasslike colours. So much cleaner.

 

How can an emulator-recorded video that isn't using an exact palette be "cleaner"? Surely only the real colours on the real machine can truly be "clean" otherwise the near matches from hardware like the CPC Plus would be valid.

 

Exactly, I could use an A8 emu, load a different, less "glassy" palette, make a YT video that blurs it even further and say, Crownland looks awful. Which is why I requested he didn't go YT hunting for MiM vids cuz they're all shite on there. As it is I really like the look of Crownland (apart maybe from the somewhat pastel sprites) and it's on my list somewhere (as port this to C64 just to stop people saying C64 can't do this). Me and Ste have already had a good old look at the graphics and it's pretty much doable for the background. Sprites... welll

 

 

Pete

[PeteD]

 

 

Display it's all about hardware. A certain computer will always have a certain type of display depending on it's hardware. All computers differs in display.

 

So, now for about the 1 millionth time, YOU PREFER the Atari 800, especially the pre-XL version. So WHY do you continue to post things like, the C64 can't do this? Firstly, technically in the case of Crownland you're wrong so the only way it's BETTER is because YOU PREFER it but you'll continue to antagonise people who don't agree with you. ho hum, I did say you wouldn't stop the other day and I was right.

 

 

Pete

 

Because some people keeps posting annoying comments aimed at me. Else i wouldn't have done even one more posting in this thread. Knock it off, and you don't have to see me here anymore.

 

So get a life and ignore them. They're having a laugh with "rainbows" and you retaliate against one person, say it's all their fault yet antagonise about 5 other people to get "revenge". By deliberately aiming your response at a wider group by saying "C64 can't.." etc you seem to be purposefully starting the whole argument again.

 

 

Pete

[DimensionX]

At least we agree of one thing. These two games looks very different. I personally prefer Crownland by far for it's almost glasslike colours. So much cleaner.

 

How can an emulator-recorded video that isn't using an exact palette be "cleaner"? Surely only the real colours on the real machine can truly be "clean" otherwise the near matches from hardware like the CPC Plus would be valid.

 

Exactly, I could use an A8 emu, load a different, less "glassy" palette, make a YT video that blurs it even further and say, Crownland looks awful. Which is why I requested he didn't go YT hunting for MiM vids cuz they're all shite on there. As it is I really like the look of Crownland (apart maybe from the somewhat pastel sprites) and it's on my list somewhere (as port this to C64 just to stop people saying C64 can't do this). Me and Ste have already had a good old look at the graphics and it's pretty much doable for the background. Sprites... welll

 

 

Pete

 

I was Atari 8bit owner for many years. Then i owned a ST for almost 11 years. Most of my friends had a C64 or Amiga. So i'm well aware of the palette differences for real too. Not in Crownland off course, but in most other games. So i'm not just an emulator gamer i can tell you.

 

I have owned an Amiga too.

 

Even a Fairchild Channel F (1979)

[TMR]

Me and Ste have already had a good old look at the graphics and it's pretty much doable for the background. Sprites... welll

 

Frohn and i talked about it ages back, since there aren't more than three objects a scanline y'can just use one sprite for the player and three overlaid high res sprites with horizontal expansion enabled per enemy - that gives you three objects with three independent colours each.

[DimensionX]

 

 

Display it's all about hardware. A certain computer will always have a certain type of display depending on it's hardware. All computers differs in display.

 

So, now for about the 1 millionth time, YOU PREFER the Atari 800, especially the pre-XL version. So WHY do you continue to post things like, the C64 can't do this? Firstly, technically in the case of Crownland you're wrong so the only way it's BETTER is because YOU PREFER it but you'll continue to antagonise people who don't agree with you. ho hum, I did say you wouldn't stop the other day and I was right.

 

 

Pete

 

Because some people keeps posting annoying comments aimed at me. Else i wouldn't have done even one more posting in this thread. Knock it off, and you don't have to see me here anymore.

 

So get a life and ignore them. They're having a laugh with "rainbows" and you retaliate against one person, say it's all their fault yet antagonise about 5 other people to get "revenge". By deliberately aiming your response at a wider group by saying "C64 can't.." etc you seem to be purposefully starting the whole argument again.

 

 

Pete

 

Just a last comment to set things right.

 

YOU are telling the Atarians in this thread that Atari can't do that, that and that. Because that's what i hear most of the time. But that's okey i'm suppose?

 

A discussion like this will bring no good anyway.

 

Action say more then words. Let's hope for more new fantastic games for both Atari and C64 in the future.

[PeteD]

 

 

Just a last comment to set things right.

 

YOU are telling the Atarians in this thread that Atari can't do that, that and that. Because that's what i hear most of the time. But that's okey i'm suppose?

 

A discussion like this will bring no good anyway.

 

Action say more then words. Let's hope for more new fantastic games for both Atari and C64 in the future.

 

That's because half the people telling you you're wrong ARE Atarians. There's a difference between fact and fiction and I'm afriad you're on the wrong side of it most of the time. And what constitutes an Atarian? Someone like you who denies any possibility that another machine can do something better or thinking someone saying a different machine can do something better MUST be wrong? I've got an Atari, I've no doubt done more programming on it than you have I've also programmed many other machines so when I say something factual like "the C64 can display more and more colourful sprites on a line than the A8", it's not some made up crap just to say the C64 is better, it's simply a fact. If you don't like it I suggest you hide away in a dark room playing Atari games and missing out on all the other machines.

 

 

Pete

Edited May 1, 2010 by PeteD

[TMR]

A discussion like this will bring no good anyway.

 

If the discussion stays to the programming topics it's meant to be covering it will because the bulk of what i learnt about the Atari 8-bit series came from a discussion similar to this one on USENet around a decade ago. The things you read in the programming books or wikipedia are nowhere near the entire story.

 

Action say more then words. Let's hope for more new fantastic games for both Atari and C64 in the future.

 

If you'd put half the effort into learning to program that you've thrown into this discussion, you could be one of the people writing new Atari 8-bit games.

[DimensionX]

A discussion like this will bring no good anyway.

 

If the discussion stays to the programming topics it's meant to be covering it will because the bulk of what i learnt about the Atari 8-bit series came from a discussion similar to this one on USENet around a decade ago. The things you read in the programming books or wikipedia are nowhere near the entire story.

 

Action say more then words. Let's hope for more new fantastic games for both Atari and C64 in the future.

 

If you'd put half the effort into learning to program that you've thrown into this discussion, you could be one of the people writing new Atari 8-bit games.

 

I would be far better of doing what i'm good at in that case, coming up with new ideas for game design, and perhaps the sound (read music) in that case. I always have new ideas for just about everything and games isn't any exception. We are all good at different things and the programmer part isn't simply my part of any game. I deal a bit with graphics too, but not in code. Perhaps i could come up with some new ideas for fun games that can be a reality.

[TMR]

I would be far better of doing what i'm good at in that case, coming up with new ideas for game design, and perhaps the sound (read music) in that case. I always have new ideas for just about everything and games isn't any exception. We are all good at different things and the programmer part isn't simply my part of any game. I deal a bit with graphics too, but not in code. Perhaps i could come up with some new ideas for fun games that can be a reality.

 

You'll need to learn what the A8 hardware can and can't do first, designing a game without that knowledge will result in whoever is programming it saying "that can't be done".

Edited May 1, 2010 by TMR

[DimensionX]

I would be far better of doing what i'm good at in that case, coming up with new ideas for game design, and perhaps the sound (read music) in that case. I always have new ideas for just about everything and games isn't any exception. We are all good at different things and the programmer part isn't simply my part of any game. I deal a bit with graphics too, but not in code. Perhaps i could come up with some new ideas for fun games that can be a reality.

 

You'll need to learn what the A8 hardware can and can't do first, designing a game without that knowledge will result in whoever is programming it saying "that can't be done".

 

I understand exactly what you mean TMR. That's why i added "that can be a reality" in my text. In other words nothing that hasn't aldready be done several times in many games before, quite simple things, but with a new twist that makes the game more fun and interesting to play. Pure gameplay in other words. Often you can make a quite simple game much more fun by removing some parts of it and add other more interesting parts. Or you can make a simple platform game with some new ideas that hasn't been done before, and at the same time keep it easy to run for the computer.

Edited May 1, 2010 by DimensionX

[TMR]

You'll need to learn what the A8 hardware can and can't do first, designing a game without that knowledge will result in whoever is programming it saying "that can't be done".

 

I understand exactly what you mean TMR. That's why i added "that can be a reality" in my text. In other words nothing that hasn't aldready be done several times in many games before, quite simple things

 

No, that wasn't what i meant at all - the hardware can do loads of interesting stuff and some of it hasn't been exploited for games use (some of it isn't really viable for games use or at least doesn't present any obvious possibilities) but those techniques have specific hardware-defined rules that need to be observed - without knowing where those boundaries lie, it's close to impossible to design a game.

Edited May 1, 2010 by TMR

[Barnacle boy]

It's not doing Crownland justice either. I will look for Mayhem in Monsterland on YT.

 

Now you see the differences between the machines.

 

The games are nothing you even could call for similar. Especially not in the colourdepartment...

 

Each level in Mayhem has two states, first 'sad' (all grey and miserable), then 'happy' (bright and colourful). The video you linked to above was a level in sad mode.

 

Happy mode looks like this:

 

 

It's Magic 2 is another one to check out:

 

 

and Flimbo's Quest has some nice parallax scrolling:

 

 

And yes, i like A8's special graphics that no other computer can display. To see something like C64, but way better, watch Atari ST in action. To watch something like A8, the only thing is to watch another A8 in action. Either you like it, or not, but that's A8.

 

To see something like the A8, but way better, watch the c64 in action.

 

It's just my opinion! Let's hope for more new fantastic games for both Atari and C64 in the future.

 

Remember, the only thing that matters is to make or play a good game.

[Bryan]

1. 800/XL/XE Video: Atari's video circuits are a bit different from model to model and as many people have demonstrated over the years, changing a few parts can drastically improve picture quality. Many 800XL's suffer from an incorrect resistor choice at the factory.

 

2. Crownland is a beautiful game, but you have to remember how much more difficult it is to do something like that on the Atari than the 64 (which is why most Atari platformers look so bland). So, quite often there's a big difference in the kind of results the average programmer can achieve on the two machines. Of course, IMO, that just makes it more rewarding to show-off and do it on the Atari.

Edited May 1, 2010 by Bryan

[PeteD]

 

 

2. Crownland is a beautiful game, but you have to remember how much more difficult it is to do something like that on the Atari than the 64 (which is why most Atari platformers look so bland). So, quite often there's a big difference in the kind of results the average programmer can achieve on the two machines. Of course, IMO, that just makes it more rewarding to show-off and do it on the Atari.

 

The thing is, Crownland isn't that difficult, it's just well thought out. The scrolling, parallax etc should all be easier on the A8 because of the CPU, the things like the water are possible because of the bigger palette, the hardest part is the sprites, using 2 PMGs for the multicolour and still having a decent number on screen but vertically that's no biggy either, it's not like they're all zooming around on Y. Even the colours per line is bigger on A8 (5 possible) if you don't want to use extra CPU to scroll colour RAM on the C64. To me it just shows what's possible when someone applies some thinking OTHER than the old, "Lets do 4 shades, maybe a rainbow (and that's not a pisstake) and that'll look nice".

 

It's a point I kept trying to make in the other Vs threads when people were saying A8 games didn't look that great because the coders were lazy or it wasn't worth the effort. It obviously is as Crownland looks really good and it's not doing anything crazy.

 

 

Pete

Edited May 1, 2010 by PeteD

[DimensionX]

1. 800/XL/XE Video: Atari's video circuits are a bit different from model to model and as many people have demonstrated over the years, changing a few parts can drastically improve picture quality. Many 800XL's suffer from an incorrect resistor choice at the factory.

 

2. Crownland is a beautiful game, but you have to remember how much more difficult it is to do something like that on the Atari than the 64 (which is why most Atari platformers look so bland). So, quite often there's a big difference in the kind of results the average programmer can achieve on the two machines. Of course, IMO, that just makes it more rewarding to show-off and do it on the Atari.

 

No hard feelings Bryan. Thanks for your info.

[DimensionX]

It's not doing Crownland justice either. I will look for Mayhem in Monsterland on YT.

 

Now you see the differences between the machines.

 

The games are nothing you even could call for similar. Especially not in the colourdepartment...

 

Each level in Mayhem has two states, first 'sad' (all grey and miserable), then 'happy' (bright and colourful). The video you linked to above was a level in sad mode.

 

Happy mode looks like this:

 

 

It's Magic 2 is another one to check out:

 

 

and Flimbo's Quest has some nice parallax scrolling:

 

 

And yes, i like A8's special graphics that no other computer can display. To see something like C64, but way better, watch Atari ST in action. To watch something like A8, the only thing is to watch another A8 in action. Either you like it, or not, but that's A8.

 

To see something like the A8, but way better, watch the c64 in action.

 

It's just my opinion! Let's hope for more new fantastic games for both Atari and C64 in the future.

 

Remember, the only thing that matters is to make or play a good game.

 

At last...it's my turn to comment. What we are watching in the first game is (to be a bit sarcastic)

 

1.Lack of parallax

2.C64's typical green

3.Big objects with lack of any clear colour (bad youtube clip?)

4.And, where's the playability?

 

In the other game

 

1.A static black mountain

2.Clouds to save processor power instead of to parallax the whole screen

3.C64's typical green again

4.Lack of any clear colours (bad quality of the yt clip?)

5.Sadly it seems to be lack of any playability too.

 

And...Flimbo looks messy. I guess it's because of a real bad YT clip?

 

No, i'm not impressed...not yet.

 

In fact, i even more impressed by this game, on a completly different computer. Here is, good graphics, playability and replayvalue.

 

And this (second after batman) (i like 3D isometric games) Here we find good clear graphics, playability and replay value.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWKL9rpDZv4

 

And what impresses me most of all, is this, because of great playability and replay value for the latest 27 years. Unfortanly they never released it for the 5200 console. I can play this game anytime. In fact, i played it an hour ago.

Edited May 1, 2010 by DimensionX

[PeteD]

lol Crownland is more playable than MiM, a game it's basically ripping off? okaaaay then.

 

Honestly with the rest of your comments you're just showing your lack of technical knowledge in how this stuff works. You obviously don't want to learn so there's no point wasting time trying to teach you

 

It seems no matter what anyone posts, you're just not going to like it for the sake of being belligerent. As I've said, you've picked a game that doesn't exist on the C64 and then when people post the closest eqivalents the one with the most impressive colours welll, that's no good it doesn't parallax as much, the one with bigger more complex parallax than Crownland, weeeeel, that's no good, it's green.

 

 

You sir are a waste of time.

 

 

 

Pete

[DimensionX]

lol Crownland is more playable than MiM, a game it's basically ripping off? okaaaay then.

 

Honestly with the rest of your comments you're just showing your lack of technical knowledge in how this stuff works. You obviously don't want to learn so there's no point wasting time trying to teach you

 

It seems no matter what anyone posts, you're just not going to like it for the sake of being belligerent. As I've said, you've picked a game that doesn't exist on the C64 and then when people post the closest eqivalents the one with the most impressive colours welll, that's no good it doesn't parallax as much, the one with bigger more complex parallax than Crownland, weeeeel, that's no good, it's green.

 

 

You sir are a waste of time.

 

 

 

Pete

 

I never said that Crownland was playable, and it isn't.

[PeteD]

lol Crownland is more playable than MiM, a game it's basically ripping off? okaaaay then.

 

Honestly with the rest of your comments you're just showing your lack of technical knowledge in how this stuff works. You obviously don't want to learn so there's no point wasting time trying to teach you

 

It seems no matter what anyone posts, you're just not going to like it for the sake of being belligerent. As I've said, you've picked a game that doesn't exist on the C64 and then when people post the closest eqivalents the one with the most impressive colours welll, that's no good it doesn't parallax as much, the one with bigger more complex parallax than Crownland, weeeeel, that's no good, it's green.

 

 

You sir are a waste of time.

 

 

 

Pete

 

I never said that Crownland was playable, and it isn't.

 

You asked for comparisons for Crownland from the C64, therefore your points are remarks on that request. If you're now going to say crownland isn't playable, why list that on each C64 game?

 

*edit*

Also, how do you judge the playability of a game from a YT video?

 

 

Pete

Edited May 1, 2010 by PeteD