Adventure II XE demo and testing

[leech]

1 hour ago, Cafeman said:

Well, this idea was kind of a bust!   I only got one response, so this is a bump just in case anybody is interested in drawing an image. I suppose this is another clue for me just to wrap the whole thing up and call it done! 

I would have, but my artistic talent is pretty shit!

[kiwilove]

On 5/5/2020 at 3:54 AM, Cafeman said:

Well, this idea was kind of a bust!   I only got one response, so this is a bump just in case anybody is interested in drawing an image. I suppose this is another clue for me just to wrap the whole thing up and call it done! 

If you posted this request up in the 8-bit and/or 5200 regular forums - I would think you would get some very keen volunteers?  And although one particular person may be involved with other projects - I don't think he would pass up on contributing to this one - as it's not like the others.  And there's probably others who could step in/up instead?  You do have some nice functional graphics currently - some could be improved upon.  I think a few tweaks here and there - could be made.

{Looks like I need to correct myself.  TIX has provided some input/changes - exactly who I was thinking of, who could make changes.

  I have not read this entire thread - and have read only little of it - but have looked at the demo video.  See that very little can be done.

  The only problem with updating the demo is to have it working with cohesion/consistency.  Seeing what bits can be improved because other   parts now look better.  Smoothing rough edges out - so to speak of.}

 

Though for a decent graphics upgrade for this game - you needed to allow for this - right at the start in allocating enough extra characters so as to allow more detailed graphics to be present.  Even a few more allocated for this or that use (road, greenery, etc) can be a great help without taking up a lot more memory.

 

What would of course really help - is to allow for a few animated characters to be present/used - that is, if you had enough free memory to do so.

The way to be able to include these I'd guess is to make use of bankswitching on a Atarimax 8mbit cart?  But even if you stuck with a 48K min system you might squeeze something in?

 

Harvey

 

 

Edited May 10, 2020 by kiwilove

[kiwilove]

I like to add - that I do like to see projects finished with polish - and not efforts in which they could look that little bit better - had the right people become involved with it.

I'm not drawing that much these days - and my interest isn't in doing so, but I can contribute from time to time - if no one else takes it up.

But I'll guess you want to wrap this up, without dragging it on for another 3 months or less.

 

There has been missing a first rate looking game of this particular type - while no one can come up to the standard of - The Legend of Zelda - as on the SNES - I do think a better look can be done - that looks better than the 2600 standard.

I'm always amazed that people have stuck with 2600 development - and don't simply move onto the Atari 8-bit/5200 standard, in which the graphics can be looking so much better - but you have use the characters necessary to allow for this.  To have blocky graphics - and plain simple graphics - for me, always take away from the game.  But I'm a graphics guy who enjoys seeing neat graphics in action.

 

Harvey

[leech]

3 hours ago, kiwilove said:

I like to add - that I do like to see projects finished with polish - and not efforts in which they could look that little bit better - had the right people become involved with it.

I'm not drawing that much these days - and my interest isn't in doing so, but I can contribute from time to time - if no one else takes it up.

But I'll guess you want to wrap this up, without dragging it on for another 3 months or less.

 

There has been missing a first rate looking game of this particular type - while no one can come up to the standard of - The Legend of Zelda - as on the SNES - I do think a better look can be done - that looks better than the 2600 standard.

I'm always amazed that people have stuck with 2600 development - and don't simply move onto the Atari 8-bit/5200 standard, in which the graphics can be looking so much better - but you have use the characters necessary to allow for this.  To have blocky graphics - and plain simple graphics - for me, always take away from the game.  But I'm a graphics guy who enjoys seeing neat graphics in action.

 

Harvey

I think one of the main reasons people target the 2600 over the 8bit/5200 is 1) the popularity of the 2600 simply can't be matched, especially by anything Atari has ever done since.  2) the challenge of making something for the 2600.

 

I mean resource wise, the 8bit computers especially have SO much more potential and wiggle room to make things look decent, especially with some of the modern modifications available.  The 2600 has none of that.  I mean on the basis of graphics, you'd think there would be a lot more homebrew for the 7800 as well.

[kiwilove]

18 hours ago, leech said:

I think one of the main reasons people target the 2600 over the 8bit/5200 is 1) the popularity of the 2600 simply can't be matched, especially by anything Atari has ever done since.  2) the challenge of making something for the 2600.

 

I mean resource wise, the 8bit computers especially have SO much more potential and wiggle room to make things look decent, especially with some of the modern modifications available.  The 2600 has none of that.  I mean on the basis of graphics, you'd think there would be a lot more homebrew for the 7800 as well.

The 2600 has never appealed to me - or else I probably would have bought one back in the day?  But there wasn't a distributor here for it, I don't think.  I knew of it, and what it's graphics were like - but ugh! it's only a bit better over the TRS-80 standard.  There was a TRS-80 clone over here, but I couldn't really like it.  I was waiting on for a decent home computer system with decent graphics on it - something cheaper than a Apple II?  I was really after that could deliver arcade quality graphics?  Even when I did buy a Atari 800 in Dec 82 - I really didn't know what I was buying at that time - with only Star Raiders and Pacman as examples to go by and play.  But just a few months later - Blue Max and Encounter appeared - and I was more than pleased with them.  Also a lot of other titles delivered - Miner 2049'er, Donkey Kong, Pole Position and so on.

The Atari 8-bit hardware does have limitations to it - namely fewer sprites than C-64 and NES.  For certain games they can be worked around.  It's only lately that tougher games are being worked in which the programmer has to go out of the way to do better.  The likes of Galaga.

You could look at Scramble as a comparison across systems? Or Donkey Kong?

I'm only a graphics guy - and no programmer.

 

I'm not convinced of the superiority of the 7800 hardware.  Galaga was not the best possible on it?  They went for a low resolution.  And while Xevious was competently done - I don't like the closer up viewpoint they chose for it.  The C-64 conversion went the same route and it was disaster.

I'd guess memory problems was key - it was designed when memory chips were expensive.  While Plutos and Sirius look pretty decent going - they still could do with a little more improvement - more animations present?  Color (or colors) are lacking.  But this would require more memory - which the system doesn't have?  Probably why Galaga was done the way it was done - due to memory constraints.  Not including a decent quality sound chip shows how stingy they were for it's cost.

Anyway with all the 2600 development going on - I always think of how much better they can look, in an 8-bit Atari way.  Why people would move from the 2600 to the 5200 in general - for better graphics.  But I guess popularity is king.

 

Harvey

[leech]

5 hours ago, kiwilove said:

The 2600 has never appealed to me - or else I probably would have bought one back in the day?  But there wasn't a distributor here for it, I don't think.  I knew of it, and what it's graphics were like - but ugh! it's only a bit better over the TRS-80 standard.  There was a TRS-80 clone over here, but I couldn't really like it.  I was waiting on for a decent home computer system with decent graphics on it - something cheaper than a Apple II?  I was really after that could deliver arcade quality graphics?  Even when I did buy a Atari 800 in Dec 82 - I really didn't know what I was buying at that time - with only Star Raiders and Pacman as examples to go by and play.  But just a few months later - Blue Max and Encounter appeared - and I was more than pleased with them.  Also a lot of other titles delivered - Miner 2049'er, Donkey Kong, Pole Position and so on.

The Atari 8-bit hardware does have limitations to it - namely fewer sprites than C-64 and NES.  For certain games they can be worked around.  It's only lately that tougher games are being worked in which the programmer has to go out of the way to do better.  The likes of Galaga.

You could look at Scramble as a comparison across systems? Or Donkey Kong?

I'm only a graphics guy - and no programmer.

 

I'm not convinced of the superiority of the 7800 hardware.  Galaga was not the best possible on it?  They went for a low resolution.  And while Xevious was competently done - I don't like the closer up viewpoint they chose for it.  The C-64 conversion went the same route and it was disaster.

I'd guess memory problems was key - it was designed when memory chips were expensive.  While Plutos and Sirius look pretty decent going - they still could do with a little more improvement - more animations present?  Color (or colors) are lacking.  But this would require more memory - which the system doesn't have?  Probably why Galaga was done the way it was done - due to memory constraints.  Not including a decent quality sound chip shows how stingy they were for it's cost.

Anyway with all the 2600 development going on - I always think of how much better they can look, in an 8-bit Atari way.  Why people would move from the 2600 to the 5200 in general - for better graphics.  But I guess popularity is king.

 

Harvey

I don't really want to derail the topic here, but if you look at Adventure II as released on the 5200, you can see it was, and years earlier, a very capable machine when compared to the NES.  The problem is it simply didn't have the support, and right away the controllers were a problem.  Probably the greatest video game innovation for many years to come, poorly implemented.   If the controller had some sort of auto centering option, and they hadn't broken so easily, who knows where the industry would have gone.

 

Think about it, analog controlls were not common on any home console until I think the PS2 generation?  Plenty of Arcades had them.

 

Anyhow, if you are great at graphics, submit some for this please?  We all want to see an awesome upgraded version of this game!

[kiwilove]

5 hours ago, leech said:

I don't really want to derail the topic here, but if you look at Adventure II as released on the 5200, you can see it was, and years earlier, a very capable machine when compared to the NES.  The problem is it simply didn't have the support, and right away the controllers were a problem.  Probably the greatest video game innovation for many years to come, poorly implemented.   If the controller had some sort of auto centering option, and they hadn't broken so easily, who knows where the industry would have gone.

 

Think about it, analog controlls were not common on any home console until I think the PS2 generation?  Plenty of Arcades had them.

 

Anyhow, if you are great at graphics, submit some for this please?  We all want to see an awesome upgraded version of this game!

I don't think the 5200 is a good/great contender against the NES - with having less sprites available for normal use. (This is looking back now).

The gap between these particular systems can seem to be closer through tricks done by an experienced programmer.

I remember 1982 particularly well?  I looked through various magazines available to me, in this part of the world and I was wanting to buy a home computer system towards the end of the year.  I ended up with an Atari 800 with 48k and I think I was fortunate to have gone that route, given how time passed on.

 

I don't think I can be of any help with this particular game.   With TIX's involvement - that was the sort of person I thought who ought to contribute to it.

But with any project like this - or any new project - I'd think the graphics part should be thought out carefully so as to allocate the maximum possible for nice graphics to be present.  It does not need to hog a great deal of memory to improve the graphics.

This game is a prime example of how it could be done?  I'm only talking about needing a few more characters (of the character set) for specific graphics usage.  Such as bushes, roads/paths - so as to not have that too plain look to the whole game.

For example the greenery/forestry in Xevious - need not take up a lot of graphics.  I came upon a method while working on Hawkquest.  I forget the exact number - was it 7?  or at most 10 characters?  I wonder if anyone looked at the arcade graphics to see how many were used there?

That allocating a few more characters here and there for use - will enable a graphics person the capability to improve upon the whole look of the game.

And adding animation here and there - is helpful too.  To use more than 2 frames of animation - which is only on/off. A minimum of 4 characters allow for reasonable animation to be possible.  8 frames would be a luxury.

Animation for sprites would be good too.  More frames can be used for something seen often enough - like explosions, and your death scene.

But this should be slowed down so as to be seen to be noticed. Too fast animation simply doesn't look good/effective.

Few Programmers are effective artists - so get some one good enough to design the graphics for you.  If you can draw your own graphics. Fine.

 

I got burned out - doing the graphics for AtariBlast!.  I wasn't up for designing so much original graphics - that I chose to re-use other peoples' graphics - and revisit my earlier work in Laser Hawk and HawkQuest - I did update them a bit or a lot.  It ended up being a homage to various games.

 

When working on a Scramble conversion - I was keen on the idea - of not simply sticking with the original graphics in every way, but to depart from it, a bit here and there.  The programmer was OK with doing it this way.  For those who can clock the game several times over - some small changes can be seen.  Maybe at some time a long play video will appear to show this?  I'm not a good enough player, to do this myself - as it's as hard as the coin-op.

 

So what I am saying - is that you can add some changes so as to make the game you are working on - look that bit better - so that it does have that polished look to it and helps make the game stand out.

 

Harvey

 

 

 

 

 

 

[phonedork]

On 4/23/2020 at 8:08 PM, Cafeman said:

Meanwhile, another little tweak ... when playing Special Difficulty Levels,  the dragons will eventually come back to life (same as 5200 version but it takes more time for them to revive) . They will now revive into a random new dragon each time now. In the 5200 version, they kind of had a zombie dragon look but now they have a distinct more unified look.  Meet the Silver Dragon: 

 

 

- another tweak I put in recently - if you pause (via the OPTION button, or SpaceBar), you can Un-Pause with a joystick button press. 

- The only real final tweak I want to add will be some new tapestry images from whoever submits some ideas!    After this tweak in early May, I'll post a final demo to play.   

Hey, 

What if when a dragon resurrects it transforms into the original Atari 2600 duck dragons! The red would be fast like the 2600 lol

[+Cafeman]

2 minutes ago, phonedork said:

Hey, 

What if when a dragon resurrects it transforms into the original Atari 2600 duck dragons! The red would be fast like the 2600 lol

I like your idea, but " Atari " forbade the use of any 2600 Adventure visual elements, so I gave up on using duck dragons a long time ago. I'm still following the rules, just in case. Plus that would be more work, the game is basically done. 

[Shannon]

Any word on this?  I was just telling someone about the great sequel to the original Adventure.  

 

[+Cafeman]

I think the game is done.  I do want to release a demo based on the newest build. A d i want to do some more testing. I had back surgery and I'm still recovering, I am not able to sit upright at a desk for long, so I haven't been doing any homebrew work lately.  

[Shannon]

Thanks for the update.  I know how things can be regarding back surgery.  I've had back issues most of my life.

 

Take yer time... I was just wondering what was up.  

 

[leech]

59 minutes ago, Cafeman said:

I think the game is done.  I do want to release a demo based on the newest build. A d i want to do some more testing. I had back surgery and I'm still recovering, I am not able to sit upright at a desk for long, so I haven't been doing any homebrew work lately.  

One of the cooler things they finally did at the office was get desks that adjust up and down so we can stand or sit.  Then the pandemic happened shortly after, so back to sitting at a computer all day...

But yeah, I bet even switching from standing to sitting would suck after back surgery.  Hope you are back at 100% soon!

[Shannon]

I know when I had a back operation years ago I couldn't work for a month.  Had weight lifting restrictions and I believe sitting restrictions as well.  My wife gave birth at that time as well.  Lots of time wasted on "Duje Nukem" in those days!

 

Now my sister on the other hand had an operation more recently and I think the requirements are not as stiff these days.

[+Cafeman]

I'm wasting a lot of my time watching shows and movies, been playing thru Skies of Arcadia on DC but after 2 hours I can't sit any more. I'm on a lot of pain meds, the narcotics end in a day or two.

[+Cafeman]

New DEMO dated 06/20/2020 -- see page 1:   https://atariage.com/forums/topic/213695-adventure-ii-xe-demo-and-testing/

 

 

This is a release candidate. I'm not adding any more content. Despite my requests above for some bg art on the tapestries, I decided to NOT add that.  It's time to call it quits and publish this game soon!   Please report any major bugs in this thread with screenshot or detailed description. Thanks! 
 

I think the only difference between this version and the one I released in February would be some collision detection improvements so you don’t get stuck with certain alt icons, and all the keys have their own unique shapes now. And I added level 10 to this demo, which is Advanced difficulty.  

[+Philsan]

4 hours ago, Cafeman said:

New DEMO dated 06/20/2020 -- see page 1:   https://atariage.com/forums/topic/213695-adventure-ii-xe-demo-and-testing/

 

I tested all versions on AVGCart and they all work (XEGS bin as-is, AtariMax versions must be converted to CAR format).

 

[Shannon]

Thanks cafeman I'll give it a go.  I really need to map the mazes.  For some reason they confuse me in my old age!

[tjlazer]

Thanks for the update!

[Zap!]

Awesome, thanks. Any idea when you will be taking orders?

[leech]

2 hours ago, Zap! said:

Awesome, thanks. Any idea when you will be taking orders?

I am hoping that Al gets this and the JagGD cart at roughly the same time so I can put in an order!

[+Cafeman]

On 6/21/2020 at 10:18 PM, Zap! said:

Awesome, thanks. Any idea when you will be taking orders?

It will be through the AtariAge store.  Now discussing the finishing touches on the manual, art, label, manufacturing.  

[Albert]

Here's a look at the label for Adventure II XE, with beautiful artwork by David Exton. 

 

[AtariBrian]

Holy shit that label and cart look sweet!! Woops, did I just cuss out loud? 

[leech]

1 hour ago, Albert said:

Here's a look at the label for Adventure II XE, with beautiful artwork by David Exton. 

 

Damn that is pretty!