Mine Comparison

[José Pereira]

Seriously, Jose - you should at least PLAY these games before getting all excited and dragging everyone into it.

 

I just tried it in the emulator, and it's utter shite.

I didn't say that the game was good but with some different colouring what the difference between this one and Adax or Mission shark on A8?

See, it would be another game of the same type.

 

 

EDIT:

P.s.- And this is to someone who said, some Months ago, that he liked to see how this game could look on A8 (at the same time and same type as Rick Dangerous).

But he has so many things from me and I hope we get some of them, at least one

Edited December 3, 2011 by José Pereira

[Rybags]

Colour, resolution, graphics, the overall look, whatever.

 

None of those are the problem.

A good game first and foremost needs good gameplay. This one doesn't seem to have that.

 

We could pull every trick in the book, put 240 colours onscreen, digital sound, the works. But it wouldn't change the fact it's a dud game.

 

 

But... the version I played is single stage tape load. So, it'd probably make a reasonably easy candidate to be converted.

Problem is, it's not so straightforward - the bitmapping method is different between the 2 machines.

So, rendering routines would need to be redone.

 

Fair amount of effort, but for not much in return.

Edited December 3, 2011 by Rybags

[TMR]

By the way, TMR, in Char Ripper I can get the gfxs of a game if it is in Bitmap Mode?

 

Generally speaking, the graphics may be stored as a character set internally and expanded to the screen but there's other ways of storing or even compressing the data and some of those don't look like legitimate graphics when prodding around memory. In this particular case i've just had a look and can't see anything that looks like a valid character set in RAM and my guess would be that the characters are arranged for faster "blitting" since i'm seeing bits and pieces of detail but nothing that actually looks right.

[José Pereira]

Colour, resolution, graphics, the overall look, whatever.

 

None of those are the problem.

A good game first and foremost needs good gameplay. This one doesn't seem to have that.

 

We could pull every trick in the book, put 240 colours onscreen, digital sound, the works. But it wouldn't change the fact it's a dud game.

 

But what I thought in here might be useful for other games...

And if A8 had this it would be better than those Polish I think...

 

I was doing those screens and ideas in Rick Dangerous other way, but now I'll see if this P0&P1 overlays and PRIOR can also be used in this one.

Imagine that someone get Rick then it probably would be just replace Chars to get this one (the only difference seems that constant update screen gfxs whenever you are going further).

That was just because when I see that C64 was only using soft sprites (and this I didn't ever noticed in 2:1 ratio games) then what could I do on A8.

And more, what could I get to MASK more simple and effective than what Popmilo and I are trying in PoP..

Edited December 3, 2011 by José Pereira

[Rybags]

Rick Dangerous is streets ahead of this rubbish.

 

If you feel like pushing for something, then have a play of Rick Dangerous 2, preferably the Amiga version.

[TMR]

But... the version I played is single stage tape load. So, it'd probably make a reasonably easy candidate to be converted.

 

Memory might be an issue, it runs right up until the back end of RAM and i've found what appears to be legitimate code as far down as $0246 (i haven't prodded at it, that might be the trainers) so over 63K of memory in use; ripping the current colour data out might make space for the new data required but i'm more than a little inclined to agree with what you said, lots of buck with very little bang.

[José Pereira]

But... the version I played is single stage tape load. So, it'd probably make a reasonably easy candidate to be converted.

 

Memory might be an issue, it runs right up until the back end of RAM and i've found what appears to be legitimate code as far down as $0246 (i haven't prodded at it, that might be the trainers) so over 63K of memory in use; ripping the current colour data out might make space for the new data required but i'm more than a little inclined to agree with what you said, lots of buck with very little bang.

 

If the first, Switchblade Logo and credits and those Hi-Resolution story/introduction load in separate?

Can it be? And how much Kbs. would we win?

[Mclaneinc]

Jose, when are you going to give thought about converting Call Of Duty MW3 to the Atari?

 

You like a challenge....

 

May also stop you thinking about t*rds like Switchblade

[TMR]

If the first, Switchblade Logo and credits and those Hi-Resolution story/introduction load in separate?

Can it be?

 

Not without unmarrying the data from the main engine and it's all rather... erm, blended in there so telling where font data stops and screen data starts isn't possible without some proper disassembly - i'm not even sure there are blocks of screen data right now. All i've done to date is the equivalent of prodding at it with a stick, to actually figure out what's going on in there properly it'll be more like archeology, except more painful and without the cool vases to find.

 

And how much Kbs.

 

i've absolutely no idea because at this point i can't tell that data from anything else in there to figure out how big it is.

 

would we win?

 

You'd get a rubbish version of Switchblade into the A8 so no, that's a fail. =-)

 

[popmilo]

Seriously, Jose - you should at least PLAY these games before getting all excited and dragging everyone into it.

 

I just tried it in the emulator, and it's utter shite.

Huh.... Did you play at least till end of first level ?

 

It has huge levels, secret places, hidden destructable blocks, power ups, mid and end level bosses...

Music by Ben Daglish and that Manga style graphics...

 

It was ported to C64 quite late - two years after ST and Amiga version...

 

Heaven is right - Whole game is in bitmap mode with soft sprites. Probably for easier porting.

 

Spectrum version is interesting in that way also. It has same number of tiles per screen - so the tiles are 12x16 pixels.

That is why they didn't use different attribute colors more freely on Speccy.

 

That way all versions could use almost the same map - level - sprite data - easy to port.

 

ps. And it's a platform game with a guy who kicks enemies till they die - not many of those around!

[José Pereira]

ps. And it's a platform game with a guy who kicks enemies till they die - not many of those around!

 

At least on A8.

[José Pereira]

Rick Dangerous is streets ahead of this rubbish.

 

If you feel like pushing for something, then have a play of Rick Dangerous 2, preferably the Amiga version.

 

it's on the way...

Here you can found everything you want: http://www.rickdangerous.co.uk/

 

A mockup W.I.P. (not finished):

All fits in 1charset for the Playing Area that by now guy and three robots with shifting in just about 110chars (some gfxs that are only on some screens picked-up 'on the fly'), higher PRIOR PMs does the mask like in Switchblade (you, simply do soft sprite&gfxs masking like on ZX/CPC), possible scrolling...

Possible changing of colours&luminances on the other Levels to get the right looking Oring other colours&luminances...

 

Not C64 looking, indeed it's based on the CPC version

Edited December 7, 2011 by José Pereira

[Rybags]

Extremely unlikely the game will fit in 1 chset. Check the pages you linked with the tiles, there's lots of them.

 

The game has fairly simple mechanics, IMO it'd be an excellent conversion project.

 

I only ever played the Amiga version of RD 2 - might have to check out the C64 one and see if it's any good.

[José Pereira]

Extremely unlikely the game will fit in 1 chset. Check the pages you linked with the tiles, there's lots of them.

 

The game has fairly simple mechanics, IMO it'd be an excellent conversion project.

 

I only ever played the Amiga version of RD 2 - might have to check out the C64 one and see if it's any good.

 

About Charsets you see there lots of but could probably (some gfxs are in some screens and others don't, but 1charset would only work if not scrolling).

 

About gfxs it's best to copy the the CPC, convert into 4colours and with the PMs we can get even more colours.

It also has a nice masking of gfxs over sprites...

As usual the best 8bit looking for this kind of games it's from CPC version and when 32bytes width and a good coder even the scrolling works fine (scrolling in 4ways):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pui3H18L6E

 

C64 has the usual mix of 2:1 and 'backs' gfxs. and the Rick guy in Hi-Resolution.

Then they add the sprites but the lack of colours&luminances in their Pallete doesn't get it so nice looking.

And the bad it's that Rick2 on C64 give up of the some gfxs over sprites masking but also, as it is in 32wide bytes then there's no horizontal scrolling:

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

 

 

I prefer the CPC version with no doubts!

Edited December 7, 2011 by José Pereira

[Rybags]

PMSL. Without the video you'd swear it's a 2600, not an Amstrad.

[José Pereira]

PMSL. Without the video you'd swear it's a 2600, not an Amstrad.

[José Pereira]

PMSL. Without the video you'd swear it's a 2600, not an Amstrad.

 

Rybags what is 'PMSL'?

What are you saying?

I don't understand.

[Rybags]

PMSL = piss myself laughing. It's an upscaled LOL.

[José Pereira]

Up scaled? Great was if we have this 16colours free use in 2:1 and you would say what?

Still don't underdstand...

 

For a 2:1 ratio and their Pallete it's great...

I am always thinking that CPC guys use and abuse of their 16colours ability in 2:1 that witht their 'shining' Reds, Greens and Blues isn't real nor good looking, indeed a great mess for the Eyes.

They normally try to mess many of the 16colours in a single char 1byte x 8scanlines (our char size) that doesn't look good.

But when they go into 4colours then it looks amazing.

4colours on a char and you'll get 4different Palletes to 4different objects (16colours) and then you choose again 4colours (from that ones) for the guy (and repeat this to the other moving stuff)

 

Another CPC thing it's the way they normal do the shades/luminances of an object:

They have Redish, Greens and Blues but only White and one Gray.

Here I think it's very well used.

 

But more than this there's the gfxs masking the sprites (although sometimes it's just block/char masking others they still see behind (when they are only above the Walls gfxs).

There's 4ways scrolling...

For me it's the Amiga version in an 8bit.

 

Sorry to say this to C64 guys, but yours it isn't:

No gxs over sprites masking, no horizontal scrolling, Enemy sprites 2:1 ratio look uggly and the 3colours choosed (because of Rick colours) aren't the best.

Edited December 8, 2011 by José Pereira

[Rybags]

The proof is in the playing.

 

A static screenshot shows nothing, a video shows a little.

 

Just playing the C64 Rick Dangerous 2 shows the deficiencies vs the Amiga version.

 

Just because the Amstrad version looks prettier doesn't mean it's automatically a better game. I might have to chase up some emulation here and judge for myself.

 

As for the graphical ability - the Amstrad is spoiled (not spoilt) by over saturated palette, it might be OK for a cartoonish look but is ugly for trying to make anything realistic looking.

[José Pereira]

Yes, and no... You were saying that it looks 2600 if I understand it right.

Then I answered about looking.

Trying to get Amiga in an 8bit it's difficult.

 

-> GFXS:

For their Pallete it's very well converted.

 

-> MOVEMENTS/PLAYING/...:

You are restricted in many of the 8bits in the movements steps in the same resolution as the Mode you're using (what we on A8 call colour clock), beeing that the only best I see on C64.

With this you can move thing in only 160 colour clocks and in a 32byte wide screen may seem a little bit Blocky movement but that you also will have in an A8 version.

 

Their scrolling it's very well done in this game.

 

You have all the stuff of the 16bit versions, you have explosions, you have good colourfull sprites and screen gfxs that you can distinguish one from the others...

I still think that for an 8bit and 2:1 it's all there.

[Rybags]

I said nothing about it "looking 2600", that was all about the sound/music.

 

I just downloaded the game and played in emulation - not overly impressive against the C64 version, and pales compared to Amiga.

 

The graphics look kinda ugly, the palette just doesn't do it for me.

[José Pereira]

I said nothing about it "looking 2600", that was all about the sound/music.

 

I just downloaded the game and played in emulation - not overly impressive against the C64 version, and pales compared to Amiga.

 

The graphics look kinda ugly, the palette just doesn't do it for me.

 

Probably because they choose that Dark green for the walls on Level1 and would go better with real Blues (as they only have 1Gray) or Gray and Blue.

And, o.k., those Robots could had other colour to distinguisg better from the walls (but other guys have different colours) but, at least, Rick seems very good and similar to Amiga because they have those Orange,Red&Yellow and the dark Blue.

 

Against C64 it's the scrolling and some masking

Edited December 8, 2011 by José Pereira

[José Pereira]

(Still not finished ...)

Edited December 8, 2011 by José Pereira

[emkay]

Rick Dangerous is the best candidate for the A8.

 

http://rickdangerousflash.free.fr/

 

If you want, in mode E with PM Overlays.

Or as a A8 / Amiga Version in Gr. 7 with all the cool Digis (that made the fun in the game special )