What Games On Other Systems Show The Jaguar's Power?

[kevincal]

On a side note, the 32X is getting a homebrew port of Wolfenstein 3D, and its looking really good. It will be nice to compare it with the Jag and 3DO ports if it ever gets finished. Kudos to the coders doing the port, its looking really great.

Now if someone would port Marathon to the Jag...

 

I've seen it, it's not even in the same league as the Jag or 3DO versions... It will probably be more in line with the SNES version.

Edited May 16, 2009 by kevincal

[sd32]

You really think it will end up being that bad kevincal?, i think it already seems better than the horrid SNES port.

[kevincal]

It didn't look so hot in the video I saw of it... Maybe it will get better, but I wouldn't expect too much. Doom on the 32X wasn't that much better than Doom on the SNES after all. I know the 32X version of Wolf 3D will never get close to the Jag or 3DO port, that's for sure.

[philipj]

On a side note, the 32X is getting a homebrew port of Wolfenstein 3D, and its looking really good. It will be nice to compare it with the Jag and 3DO ports if it ever gets finished. Kudos to the coders doing the port, its looking really great.

Now if someone would port Marathon to the Jag...

 

I've seen it, it's not even in the same league as the Jag or 3DO versions... It will probably be more in line with the SNES version.

 

Check out the 32X demo youtube... Those two RISC chips on the 32X module, much like the Jag, really didn't see any meaningful potential pushed to the forefront. Plus the Saturn release caused some games to be a little watered down as far as the 32X being pushed to the limits.

 

[DracIsBack]

Check out the 32X demo youtube... Those two RISC chips on the 32X module, much like the Jag, really didn't see any meaningful potential pushed to the forefront. Plus the Saturn release caused some games to be a little watered down as far as the 32X being pushed to the limits.

 

Thanks for sharing! Neat!

[kool kitty89]

It's an interesting concept, but you're describing a hypothetical Panther. The actual Panther technology was hopelessly outdated before it was released. The SNES dominated the Panther in (most) graphics and (all) sound capability, and was already on store shelves and hugely popular before the Panther would have been ready.

 

Despite the "32-bit" label, the Panther was not at all like an ST or Amiga or any other console or home computer. It was most similar to the 7800, which was notoriously difficult to port to. It didn't have a frame buffer OR character modes (the two dominant ways to handle backgrounds), sprite X/Y position registers, collision detection, or a blitter. It could reproduce most of those effects but they were coded very differently. It also had almost no memory, just a few kilobytes available to the game. Most ST/Amiga/home computer games of the day relied on frame buffers and generous amounts of memory.

 

The Jaguar on the other hand was a better fit for Amiga and ST ports, since it had a nice 2MB chunk of RAM, a frame buffer, and a very fast and friendly blitter (at least for 2D stuff).

 

- KS

 

I understant the 32-bit thing, at least the CPU was a normal 68000 "16/32-bit" (by modern definition a true 32-bit processor, and as much 32-bit as the 386SX, with the 16-bit data bus, with the 32x's SH2's were also stuck on).

 

Where are the specsavailable for the Panther, all I've been able to find on it is the wiki article, this one: http://ultimateconsoledatabase.com/unrelea...ari_panther.htm (which doesn't seem all that reliable, or at the very least not edited by someone with a good technical understanding)

as well as this one: http://www.homecomputer.de/pages/panther.html in which Curt Vendel describes it as

a kludged combination of the Atari ST and the Transputer Blossom video card. I have the spec's for the Panther and it was a horrible piece of junk.

-though the website he linked too no longer exists and I couldn't find any technical details here either http://www.atarimuseum.com/

 

Finally an old Panther thread here at atariage: http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=38401 but that wasn't much help either. (though several seemed to put it in a good light)

 

The sound chip is supposedly the Ensoniq OTIS, which should be the ES5505, but I have no info on this other than it supposedly supports 32 channels (or voices) of PCM. (and I would assume it would be at least as capible as the Apple IIgs's ES5503)

There's also mention of the "Panther" object processor, but I have no idea how that fits in, or what it has to do with Ventel's statement about the Blossom video card.

 

I noticed ther's a new thread on the panther here http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=143762 deosn't look like anything useful yet either, but maybe better to continue this discussion over there.

 

Edit: OK I found the specs on the Atari Museum site here: http://www.atarimuseum.com/videogames/cons...nu/jagfiles.htm

However, while it states the download is for "Panther technical spec's and software files - 92Kb" I don't see anything there about hardware specifications, there's the development tools and gme data presumebly for "Panther Pong" (listed as breakout)

And for some reason there's an "Amiga ANI Converter" in a seperate folder as well. Am I just not opening the files correctly?

Edited May 17, 2009 by kool kitty89

[kskunk]

http://www.homecomputer.de/pages/panther.html in which Curt Vendel describes it as

a kludged combination of the Atari ST and the Transputer Blossom video card. I have the spec's for the Panther and it was a horrible piece of junk.

 

I think Curt might be getting his wires slightly crossed. The Transputer Blossom used a frame buffer and blitter system, whereas the Panther had neither a frame buffer or blitter.

 

His summary is dead on though.

 

The Panther's graphics chip was the predecessor of the Jaguar's Object Processor. The two are very similar in how they operate, although the Panther had a couple of interesting features not in the Jaguar and of course the Jaguar's OP was far more flexible and advanced, and capable of producing many more colors.

 

Probably the best way to think of the Panther is a slightly weaker Sega Genesis that can display larger, zoomable, sprites. The number of on screen colors is limited like the Genesis. Unlike the SNES, there is no rotation (or "Mode 7"), no 256 color palettes, no 15-bit RGB, and no color blending/semi-transparency effects.

 

The graphical tour de force for the Panther would be a game like Afterburner.

 

In terms of CPU power, it should have been somewhat weaker than a Genesis since the CPU could only run while the (bus-hungry) graphics chip was idle. Additionally, the Genesis had 128KB of RAM split 50/50 between the CPU and graphics, while the Panther had only 32KB and was shared between graphics and CPU.

 

The sound chip is supposedly the Ensoniq OTIS, which should be the ES5505, but I have no info on this

 

The OTIS was considered at some point in development, but I don't think it was planned by the end. The PALs on the dev board had the ability to drive the OTIS, but as far as I can see only the DOCII was available in the kit.

 

There's also mention of the "Panther" object processor, but I have no idea how that fits in, or what it has to do with Ventel's statement about the Blossom video card.

 

I think he is just getting his wires crossed. There is no obvious similarity in the designs. However, there is a human connection. The ATW/Blossom project was led by Richard Miller. After that project ended Richard was put in charge of new console development. Richard knew Martin Brennen and John Mathieson from their days together at Sinclair, and brought them on board to help with Panther and eventually Jaguar.

 

- KS

Edited May 17, 2009 by kskunk

[kevincal]

Philip, I know all about the 32X tech demo. The reason they were able to pull of those graphics, is because they used all of the 32X's power and focused it ONLY on graphics in that demo. There is: no sound, no AI, no anything except a graphics demo. It's pretty impressive, but not realistic of the type of game the 32X is capable of.

[philipj]

I guess the 32X just wasn't built for that type graphics to be practical for interactivity... That's too bad. It's still the best I've seen come from the system. I think it would be cool to see someone actually pull it off for both the 32X and the Jag. Checkered Flag came pretty close.

[kool kitty89]

I think Curt might be getting his wires slightly crossed. The Transputer Blossom used a frame buffer and blitter system, whereas the Panther had neither a frame buffer or blitter.

 

His summary is dead on though.

 

That does bring an interesting thought though, a console using a (cut-down, cost reduced) blossom card would have been interesting, I don't know how well it would have worked in combination with a 68000 though.

 

In terms of CPU power, it should have been somewhat weaker than a Genesis since the CPU could only run while the (bus-hungry) graphics chip was idle. Additionally, the Genesis had 128KB of RAM split 50/50 between the CPU and graphics, while the Panther had only 32KB and was shared between graphics and CPU.

 

:shock: that really is pitiful, they should have had at least 512 kB, and preferably a dedicated video bus.

 

The OTIS was considered at some point in development, but I don't think it was planned by the end. The PALs on the dev board had the ability to drive the OTIS, but as far as I can see only the DOCII was available in the kit.

 

What's the differemces of the DOC II compared to the DOC (ES5503) of the Apple IIgs. (which seems to be a pretty decent chip, at least haveing an advantage over the SNES in numbers of channels)

 

 

Philip, I know all about the 32X tech demo. The reason they were able to pull of those graphics, is because they used all of the 32X's power and focused it ONLY on graphics in that demo. There is: no sound, no AI, no anything except a graphics demo. It's pretty impressive, but not realistic of the type of game the 32X is capable of.

 

I brought this up on sega-16 and someone suggested that you could dedicate the SH2's to doing the graphics rendering, use the genesis 68000 to do game logic and AI, and have the Z80 handel the audio. (btw the 32x's PWM can be done using the 68000 or Z80 too, though obviously to a limited degree, straight fixed-frequency PCM playback should be fine though, even using the Z80, along with doing the 6-channel FM synth and 4-channel PSG)

http://www.sega-16.com/forum/showthread.php?p=145253

 

Interestingly Gorf suggested something similar for a corrected utilization of the 68k in the Jag (other than replacing it with a 32-bit, or elliminating it entirely), by putting it on an independent data bus with 64 kB (exactly what the Genesis CPU has) and using it to drive game logic and AI.

Edited May 17, 2009 by kool kitty89

[kskunk]

That does bring an interesting thought though, a console using a (cut-down, cost reduced) blossom card would have been interesting, I don't know how well it would have worked in combination with a 68000 though.

 

Blossom was only impressive because it used wide buses and expensive chips, which allowed it to do 24-bit color at high resolutions for its time. This is not the foundation of a good console system. For example, it had no support for parallax scrolling or sprites, which were standard in the Genesis and SNES.

 

:shock: that really is pitiful, they should have had at least 512 kB, and preferably a dedicated video bus.

 

Atari was very focused on making things cheap since the Atari ST (i.e., since the Tramiels). The 32KB limit was part of keeping it cheap. To get into gory details, the object processor required a ton of bandwidth to do its job, so Atari used a 32-bit wide static RAM buffer. More than 32KB of static RAM is too expensive. To supply 512KB would have required dynamic RAM. However, dynamic RAM could not have achieved the needed bandwidth with only 32-bits.

 

The Jaguar solved the Object Processor bandwidth issue using 64-bit dynamic RAM instead of 32-bit static RAM. Just one more reason the Jaguar was a better thought-out design.

 

- KS

Edited May 17, 2009 by kskunk

[kool kitty89]

Atari was very focused on making things cheap since the Atari ST (i.e., since the Tramiels). The 32KB limit was part of keeping it cheap. To get into gory details, the object processor required a ton of bandwidth to do its job, so Atari used a 32-bit wide static RAM buffer. More than 32KB of static RAM is too expensive. To supply 512KB would have required dynamic RAM. However, dynamic RAM could not have achieved the needed bandwidth with only 32-bits.

 

The Jaguar solved the Object Processor bandwidth issue using 64-bit dynamic RAM instead of 32-bit static RAM. Just one more reason the Jaguar was a better thought-out design.

 

- KS

 

Huh, that's even more like the 7800's issues, the limited 4 kB of unified system SRAM, which several have suggested would have been better off with more, usig instead DRAM (the bandwidth issue wasn't the same), and preferably add a dedicated video bus. (which would greatly reduce Maria's weight on the CPU) Someone specifically suggested using 16 kB VRAM like the Colecovision/SG-1000/SMS

 

Using a dedicated video bus with the 32 kB of SRAM (whihc is still limited at only 1/2 of other consoles of the era) on the 32-bit bus could have helped (and would also have avoided potential problems with the 68k hogging the bus), with seperate DRAM for the 16-bit main bus with the 68000, something around 256 kB perhaps? (and you didn't mention any audio RAM, was that contained seperately with the sound chip?)

Edited May 17, 2009 by kool kitty89

[Gorf]

I would say that most 3d games on the Jag, (and a few 2d games) on the Jag compare to CD32 tiltes, however I would say in most cases, the 3do was comparitivly more powerful then the Jaguar, I would say however, in terms of what the Jaguar was capable of and not what the Jaguar games look like, the Jaguar is equal to the 32x, superior to the CD32 and inferior to the 3do, for obivous reasons the Jaguar could not compete with the more superior 32 bit consoles, such as the Saturn, PS1 and N64, however had the Jaguar 2 been releaced, it may have been just as powerful as the Saturn, PS1 and N64 and may have fixed all the Jaguar's technical problems, such as faulty processors and system glitches (such as the Red Screen of Death) unfourtantly for Atari, this console was never releaced. The Jaguar 1 however, altough it was infact a 64 bit system, most of the games on it looked 32 bit, inferior to the N64, superior to the SNES.

 

 

WRONG. 3D0 was a 50 megabyte per second system, The Jaguar is a 106 megabyte per second system.

The Jag is MORE THAN TWICE AS ABLE.....next fabel.....The JAguar was easily as powerful as the Saturn

and only 26 mb /sec slower than the PS1(133.mb/sec). Get your facts right.

THe 32 X is not even half the machine of what is in the Jaguar. CD32? See an eye doctor and a specification

interpreter.

 

 

The issue with the Jaguar was not its silicon, it was it tools. You could not find a more horses ass, horrid

toolset than what was perpetrated on the Jaguar developers....yes it was a crime.

3d0, 32x, and PS1 had tools FAR SUPERIOR in every way possible. Give me those superior tools

for the Jaguar in 1992 and Sony, 32x or 3do would have been distant seconds in the day.

In fact if we have SMAC, thre would be a BIG Difference...also not one developer new how to

run code on the GPU reliably in main RAM ...this alone would have been enough to compete

and beat any competition.

 

The Jaguar II would have been a PSX and N64 killer....killer. it would have beaten the day lights

out of both of those units. The New blitter in the Jag II would have bitch slapped either unit. IT

has twice the polies of either, fully textured shaded and with the new blitter tri-linear filtered

all in hardware......Taht wouldbe just using the GPU and Blitter. That leaves the RGPU and

DSP to put a royal ass whooping on any system of that day.

 

The red screen of death is not a fault or glitch, it denotes a bad cart or a bad connection, not a glitch.

It is a design of the system.

[Atari_Owl]

Philip, I know all about the 32X tech demo. The reason they were able to pull of those graphics, is because they used all of the 32X's power and focused it ONLY on graphics in that demo. There is: no sound, no AI, no anything except a graphics demo. It's pretty impressive, but not realistic of the type of game the 32X is capable of.

 

Its not even that impressive

Look at the draw distance people, its absolutely miniscule. No wonder it can cope with drawing the tiny amount of data required for that demo.

[kskunk]

Huh, that's even more like the 7800's issues, the limited 4 kB of unified system SRAM, which several have suggested would have been better off with more, usig instead DRAM (the bandwidth issue wasn't the same), and preferably add a dedicated video bus. (which would greatly reduce Maria's weight on the CPU) Someone specifically suggested using 16 kB VRAM like the Colecovision/SG-1000/SMS

 

Using a dedicated video bus with the 32 kB of SRAM (whihc is still limited at only 1/2 of other consoles of the era) on the 32-bit bus could have helped (and would also have avoided potential problems with the 68k hogging the bus), with seperate DRAM for the 16-bit main bus with the 68000, something around 256 kB perhaps?

 

All of these options are pretty expensive. Twin buses or exotic stuff like VRAM are 4-5x more expensive than commodities like small SRAMs and slow DRAMs. Unified RAM is a great way to save money. (That's one reason the cheaper XBox 360 has a more unified memory design than the pricier PS3.)

 

Engineers always try to add more capacity if they can. When you see these kinds of limits, it is always due to cost reduction enforced my management.

 

Small increases in component costs translate into big decreases in profits, especially when you are selling consumer electronics with razor thin profit margins in profit-hungry stores. I don't want this to be a lesson in the economics of mass production, but a $10 component increase often translates into a $50 price increase to the customer.

 

Some of the 'simple changes' people wish for these consoles would have made them cost as much as a 3DO! That's not a winning strategy either.

 

(and you didn't mention any audio RAM, was that contained seperately with the sound chip?)

 

There was no audio RAM on the final dev kit. There is an option for that in the PALs but it looks like they weren't going that direction. The sample demos we have use FM synthesis (like a Genesis), not wavetable synthesis (like a SNES).

 

Of course it's hard to tell what the Panther was going to have since it never reached production. But if anything, the dev kits usually have more features than the cost-reduced production model.

 

- KS

[philipj]

Philip, I know all about the 32X tech demo. The reason they were able to pull of those graphics, is because they used all of the 32X's power and focused it ONLY on graphics in that demo. There is: no sound, no AI, no anything except a graphics demo. It's pretty impressive, but not realistic of the type of game the 32X is capable of.

 

Its not even that impressive

Look at the draw distance people, its absolutely miniscule. No wonder it can cope with drawing the tiny amount of data required for that demo.

 

It's looked better then the games that was released on the 32X... Probably wouldn't have been good for a racing or something of that nature, but it would've good for Virtua Fighter, Zaxon, space games that wouldn't require a lot of detailed 3D background provided that a 3D artist sticks to a good polygon budget and be very mindful of camera angles.

 

Gorf

WRONG. 3D0 was a 50 megabyte per second system, The Jaguar is a 106 megabyte per second system.

The Jag is MORE THAN TWICE AS ABLE.....next fabel.....The JAguar was easily as powerful as the Saturn

and only 26 mb /sec slower than the PS1(133.mb/sec). Get your facts right.

THe 32 X is not even half the machine of what is in the Jaguar. CD32? See an eye doctor and a specification

interpreter.

 

 

The issue with the Jaguar was not its silicon, it was it tools. You could not find a more horses ass, horrid

toolset than what was perpetrated on the Jaguar developers....yes it was a crime.

3d0, 32x, and PS1 had tools FAR SUPERIOR in every way possible. Give me those superior tools

for the Jaguar in 1992 and Sony, 32x or 3do would have been distant seconds in the day.

In fact if we have SMAC, thre would be a BIG Difference...also not one developer new how to

run code on the GPU reliably in main RAM ...this alone would have been enough to compete

and beat any competition.

 

With the Cojag using an entire hard-drive to store it's game data just for video playback, it would've been cool to see that data used for more then just video playback. The KI arcade machine used a combination of both video playback and realtime 3D engine on a hard-drive using the Ultra 64 machine that turned out to not even become the N64 latter on. The Jag was/is more then able to handle it which is why I'm glad I got a Skunkboard with USB support. I think if the Jag was utilized similar to the Neo Geo handled graphics from ROM, we'll only be scratching the surface of what the Jag is capable of doing beyond 2D.

 

Kool Kitty89

I brought this up on sega-16 and someone suggested that you could dedicate the SH2's to doing the graphics rendering, use the genesis 68000 to do game logic and AI, and have the Z80 handel the audio. (btw the 32x's PWM can be done using the 68000 or Z80 too, though obviously to a limited degree, straight fixed-frequency PCM playback should be fine though, even using the Z80, along with doing the 6-channel FM synth and 4-channel PSG)

http://www.sega-16.com/forum/showthread.php?p=145253

 

Interestingly Gorf suggested something similar for a corrected utilization of the 68k in the Jag (other than replacing it with a 32-bit, or elliminating it entirely), by putting it on an independent data bus with 64 kB (exactly what the Genesis CPU has) and using it to drive game logic and AI.

 

That 2612 Yamaha chip is great music chip... Games like SOR 1,2, & 3,

, TMNT (which almost sounds like the arcade), and pretty much anything Tim Follin made really just pushed the 8-bit chip to the limit. The I know the Jag DSP is well able to handle FM synthesis because it supports a wave table but I would like to see the Jag do FM synthesis similar to the a

so that more then 8 sound channels can be used.

for the Jag was really good; I think a mod-player was used for that game.

 

I wonder if the Genesis Z80 can utilize delta compressed PCM for the 32X PWM? The Motorola really should be used for other things then sound... I don't know. The M68K should be fast/strong enough to handle both AI and sound if it shared some task with the Z80. If the game F-22 was used for 3D purposes using both the M68K and Z80 for coprocessing to produce 3D on the Genesis I don't see why both "processors" can't handle AI and sound as well provided that the RISC on the 32X handles the graphics.

Edited May 17, 2009 by philipj

[kool kitty89]

All of these options are pretty expensive. Twin buses or exotic stuff like VRAM are 4-5x more expensive than commodities like small SRAMs and slow DRAMs. Unified RAM is a great way to save money. (That's one reason the cheaper XBox 360 has a more unified memory design than the pricier PS3.)

 

Sorry, didn't meant to mention VRAM, I meant to say for MARIA to have its own RAM on a dedicated bus (but as you mention, there are cost issues with adding a second bus), hence whay I refrenced the Colecovision/SG-1000/SMS. (which obviously didn't use VRAM) Actually the only console I've noticed any mention of VRAM for is the Saturn, but this may be a typo too, with someone meaning video RAM.

 

Engineers always try to add more capacity if they can. When you see these kinds of limits, it is always due to cost reduction enforced my management.

 

Small increases in component costs translate into big decreases in profits, especially when you are selling consumer electronics with razor thin profit margins in profit-hungry stores. I don't want this to be a lesson in the economics of mass production, but a $10 component increase often translates into a $50 price increase to the customer.

 

Some of the 'simple changes' people wish for these consoles would have made them cost as much as a 3DO! That's not a winning strategy either.

 

I thought the main reson for the 3DO's rediculous cost was the decision to offer free licensing, and thus only make money directly from hardware. (whihc would be attractive to developers obviously, but was certainlyagainst the market trend of getting close to breaking even or even taking losses on hardware while making profits on 3rd party licensing and first party software sales -the later particularly strong with SEGA)

 

 

That 2612 Yamaha chip is great music chip... Games like SOR 1,2, & 3,

, TMNT (which almost sounds like the arcade), and pretty much anything Tim Follin made really just pushed the 8-bit chip to the limit. The I know the Jag DSP is well able to handle FM synthesis because it supports a wave table but I would like to see the Jag do FM synthesis similar to the a

so that more then 8 sound channels can be used.

for the Jag was really good; I think a mod-player was used for that game.

 

I wonder if the Genesis Z80 can utilize delta compressed PCM for the 32X PWM? The Motorola really should be used for other things then sound... I don't know. The M68K should be fast/strong enough to handle both AI and sound if it shared some task with the Z80. If the game F-22 was used for 3D purposes using both the M68K and Z80 for coprocessing to produce 3D on the Genesis I don't see why both "processors" can't handle AI and sound as well provided that the RISC on the 32X handles the graphics.

 

Yeah the YM 2612 is a neat chip, and the channel 6 8-bit DAC is a neat feature. And, of course, the Master System's 4-channel PSG chip adds a bit to the mix. TmEE on Sega-16 has been working on some really neat sound demos. (he's even got some decent wavetable synth going on the YM2612's DAC) -see upload

 

Of course, with the 32x it would be a bit of a waste to use the 6th channel DAC instead of FM as you've got the PWM available which is a bit more versitile (albeit requiring the samples to be in PWM format) than the YM2612 as, while a lot still has to be done in software, it at least offers timing (which has to be done in software with the 2612 DAC), and variable, allwing options of different sample rates and reslolution. (at 22.05 KHz you can do one 10-bit channel, 2 9-bit ones, or 4 8-bit ones) se this discussion: http://www.sega-16.com/forum/showthread.php?p=145392

 

Controlling the 2612 and PSG are not heavy on processing, so (on the Z80 alone) there's still a bit af room for decent digital sample playback. (though any wavetable synth would be limited, simple playback shouldn't be a problem though)

 

 

I'm not exactly sure on the Jag's audio capabilities, as I understand the DSP does everything in software, converting it with the 2 16-bit DAC's. Doing FM synth isn't particularly processor intensive, but it's still doing it in software, opposed to the Genesis which has the Yamaha chip. I'm not sure what, if any games used FM on the jaguar, I have heard some that sounded like FM, but it also sounded a lot like some Amiga music (like Dizzy), so I'm not sure, and you can of course, do wavetable synth with FM-sounding, or actual FM synth digital samples. (several SNES games had music like this, and I'm nto sure if this if what the Amiga did, or it had its own FM synth capabilities) Raiden on the Jaguar is a good example of this off the top of my head. (though this apears to be a port of the Amiga version)

 

Edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_Amiga_chipset this mentions that the Amiga's Paula sound chip was capable of simple FM synthesis.

And here's Raiden I was referring to:

(very Amiga-esque, with that kind of kazoo sound to it)

 

and the Genesis version for comparison:

(you can check the SNES one, but thatt's not FM)

 

And the arcade version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jw5vM1sEZ9Q

 

and for fun, the awesome sounding FM Towns version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsEJ8VANQ_Y (which uses the same sound hardware as the Sega CD+Genesis btw)

 

 

 

Here's TmEE's sound engine (to be used with Fusion, or real hardware only! Gens sound emulation sucks)

TMFPLAY.BIN

Edited May 18, 2009 by kool kitty89

[mcjakeqcool]

The Jaguar was 64 bit, but it should have been 32 bit, because in '93, 32 bit consoles were the most popular consoles, fast forward to 95, however, and 64 bit consoles were the most popular, the Jag should have either been marketed as a 32 bit console in '93 or a 64 bit console in '95. It most be noted that while the Jaguar is more powerful then the cd32, the cd32 is more powerful then the SNES or for that matter any fourth gen console.

[Gorf]

The Jaguar was 64 bit, but it should have been 32 bit, because in '93, 32 bit consoles were the most popular consoles, fast forward to 95, however, and 64 bit consoles were the most popular, the Jag should have either been marketed as a 32 bit console in '93 or a 64 bit console in '95. It most be noted that while the Jaguar is more powerful then the cd32, the cd32 is more powerful then the SNES or for that matter any fourth gen console.

 

 

No I do understand that thought process but to be 64 bit before anyone else was smart.

It was the execution of that plan that was the real blunder here.

 

IfI were to take the Tom and Jerry and put it into a similar design as with the PS1, ie

seperate busses and VRAM, the Jag would have easily kept up if not surpassed the

PS1. The trouble with the Jaguar console has little to do with the chipset and everything

to do with the horrible tools and unified bus....ie bad design meant to save cost, instead

of really utilizing the monster chipset that is the Tom and Jerry. The PS1 is hardwired

for polygons whre the T&J has no such limitations.....the limitations wre in the bus design

and cost cutting butchering of what should have been the console of the 90's.

[Zerosquare]

I'm not sure what, if any games used FM on the jaguar, I have heard some that sounded like FM, but it also sounded a lot like some Amiga music (like Dizzy), so I'm not sure, and you can of course, do wavetable synth with FM-sounding, or actual FM synth digital samples.

In the Jaguar SDK, there is an audio engine that supports FM synthesis in software (and IIRC, it also supports wavetable synthesis). I think that's what was used for the "FM-sounding" games.

[sd32]

The Jaguar was 64 bit, but it should have been 32 bit, because in '93, 32 bit consoles were the most popular consoles, fast forward to 95, however, and 64 bit consoles were the most popular, the Jag should have either been marketed as a 32 bit console in '93 or a 64 bit console in '95. It most be noted that while the Jaguar is more powerful then the cd32, the cd32 is more powerful then the SNES or for that matter any fourth gen console.

 

 

No I do understand that thought process but to be 64 bit before anyone else was smart.

It was the execution of that plan that was the real blunder here.

 

I have to agree with Gorf. I inmediately feel in love with the Jag due to the 64 bits advertising, and the early screenshots of AVP. In my particular case the "64 bits" campaign worked right, after all, i am still in love with the console 16 years later! I may be a weirdo, but the early mockups of Checkered Flag impressed me more than the screenshots of Crash and Burn although both ended up sucking.

I have to disagree with you mcjakeqcool, lets remember that the 32 bit consoles werent the most popular in 93 as you say, the most popular ones were the 16 bit systems, this was until Satunr and PS1 were released in 1995.

[philipj]

Here's TmEE's sound engine (to be used with Fusion, or real hardware only! Gens sound emulation sucks)

 

Now that sounds crystal clear... That's nice work.

[kool kitty89]

Now that sounds crystal clear... That's nice work.

 

Yeah, I would really like to hear what he could do with Doom music on that. I'd really like to hear a good (or even decent) rendition of E1M1 on the Genesis. (I wonder if Chillw Willy has considered any colaberation for a music engine for his homebrew projects, he's planning on Doom next -he's already working on the Wolf3D music on his own I believe)

 

But, lets not go anyfurther on this, cool, but very off topic. (though I suppose there is a parallel to the Jaguar's Doom music)

Edited May 19, 2009 by kool kitty89

[viMaster]

I wonder if Chillw Willy has considered any colaberation for a music engine for his homebrew projects, he's planning on Doom next -he's already working on the Wolf3D music on his own I believe

What do you mean? What is he doing with Doom?

[Gorf]

The Jaguar was 64 bit, but it should have been 32 bit, because in '93, 32 bit consoles were the most popular consoles, fast forward to 95, however, and 64 bit consoles were the most popular, the Jag should have either been marketed as a 32 bit console in '93 or a 64 bit console in '95. It most be noted that while the Jaguar is more powerful then the cd32, the cd32 is more powerful then the SNES or for that matter any fourth gen console.

 

 

No I do understand that thought process but to be 64 bit before anyone else was smart.

It was the execution of that plan that was the real blunder here.

 

I have to agree with Gorf. I inmediately feel in love with the Jag due to the 64 bits advertising, and the early screenshots of AVP. In my particular case the "64 bits" campaign worked right, after all, i am still in love with the console 16 years later! I may be a weirdo, but the early mockups of Checkered Flag impressed me more than the screenshots of Crash and Burn although both ended up sucking.

I have to disagree with you mcjakeqcool, lets remember that the 32 bit consoles werent the most popular in 93 as you say, the most popular ones were the 16 bit systems, this was until Satunr and PS1 were released in 1995.

 

 

Yes but the issue was Atari was in WAY over their heads.

The 64 bit part was brilliant.

 

What was NOT brilliant was the execution, follow-up and developer/retailer

support. This was not only during the Jaguar timeline but well before when

the Tramiels were notoriuos for not supporting retailers and forgetting to pay

developers on time if at all. Tools are a laughing stock in the VG industry

only second to Sony's PS3 tool(they get 1st place because they should have

learned from the Jag toolset on this one.)

 

You can't expect next gen looking games without the right tools and support

of your developers. Clearly the contracts with Atari at the time were apparently

rather loose or nonexsistant to allow Sony and Nintendo to beable to come buy

them all out from under them.

 

Buggy hardware that could have waited another 6 months and made a big differenece.

put a private 64k RAM on the 68k. Let the GPU and DSP hog the main bus. Then the

68k would have not gotten in the way just to do AI. It would have ran fine in it's own

private ram, only allowing the Blitter access to it so it can copy data from the AI and

game logic in a simple blit op.

 

The DSP should have had its own 1 meg of RAM and the GPU with its own 1 meg.

The fact is that after you get sound and graphics data in the RAM it usually takes

up about the same in each. The blitter would be the only other system to be able

to access the other three gen purps memory for data sharing.

 

What the designers wanted was no 68k at all and a 2k unified cache between

the GPU and the DSP. However Atari wanted a warm and fuzzy processor in

there to make it easy on developers. That warm and fuzzy was a hugh part

as to why we are now soaked and left out in the cold.