Finally i have the proof behind those Jaguar CD screenshots.....

[Rick Dangerous]

 

Atari Jaguar

 

Wow Zero 5 looks awesome...I really need to pick this up ASAP.

[Bill Loguidice]

Nope. Read the interview with the coder, he specifically didn't even look at the older game in order not to let it affect his work:

 

 

http://justclaws.atari.org/jagudome/zero-view.html

 

 

OK, here are more opinions from me... Based on the great interview linked above and considering this is one of the best performing 3D engines that the Jaguar featured in a commercial release, I think this puts to rest any thoughts of a playable Tomb Raider, no? Let's just use this of many snippets to see what a challenge it was getting even 3D like that found in Zero 5 (which is clearly a very directed experience, i.e., not really free roaming 3D in the Tomb Raider sense) to be pulled off by the Jaguar:

 

 

>13)Can you tell us how fast the framerate is? i.e. FPS.

It's usually around 30fps. The display is triple buffered, so it can simulate any frame rate - if we're running just below 30fps we don't have to drop to 20, it can do 29.

The frame rate is limited to a maximum of 30fps on NTSC, otherwise the slowdown would be too noticable. On the PAL version, we allow it to run at 50FPS but not for 2 consecutive frames, so the max limit is around 35FPS on PAL. It needs this, as the engine stretches all polygons vertically to keep the aspect ratio the same as NTSC, and 25fps is just slightly too jerky.

The polygon performance is around 20,000 per second if I remember correctly. That's when it's around 10% textured, and with 8-channel sound over the top (this affects performance). We used a very fast Z-sorting algorithm, we found that Z-buffering is really really slow, although Atari said Z-buffering was the fastest way of doing it, unfortunately that's complete crap. Z-sorting does mean there's a few polygon glitches, but at least it's not running at 5fps =)

 

In other words, it sounds like a lot of thought was put into how to eek the maximum performance out of the Jaguar. Factor in the additional limitations the CD add-on puts on the Jaguar and I think it's a pretty open and shut case.

Edited January 13, 2015 by Bill Loguidice

[sh3-rg]

In other words, it sounds like a lot of thought was put into how to eek the maximum performance out of the Jaguar. Factor in the additional limitations the CD add-on puts on the Jaguar and I think it's a pretty open and shut case.

Open, shut and locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard Jaguar".

[Major Havoc 2049]

Nope. Read the interview with the coder, he specifically didn't even look at the older game in order not to let it affect his work: http://justclaws.atari.org/jagudome/zero-view.html

Ya, ya....I deserve that...lol. I am aware of the difference between the levels of Zero 5 on the STe/Falcon and those of the Jaguar. I own Jaguar Zero 5 and have been a subscriber to Falcon030's youtube channel for years and have watched the video of STe/Falcon version of Zero 5 numerous times. I know the levels in Zero 5 are different, but the core concept of the game is the same and they both have the turret levels, which are similar. The Jaguar Power Pad part of my post was a stretch on my part and didn't really make my point..lol.

 

I really enjoy Zero 5 and think it is a really unique shooter. Like I said earlier, the speed at which Zero 5 pushes around polygons is impressive. I still think that games like Iron Soldier 2, Battemorph, Battlesphere and Skyhammer push the Jaguar more and look more impressive.

Edited January 14, 2015 by Major Havoc 2049

[+Stephen]

 

OK, here are more opinions from me... Based on the great interview linked above and considering this is one of the best performing 3D engines that the Jaguar featured in a commercial release, I think this puts to rest any thoughts of a playable Tomb Raider, no? Let's just use this of many snippets to see what a challenge it was getting even 3D like that found in Zero 5 (which is clearly a very directed experience, i.e., not really free roaming 3D in the Tomb Raider sense) to be pulled off by the Jaguar:

 

 

In other words, it sounds like a lot of thought was put into how to eek the maximum performance out of the Jaguar. Factor in the additional limitations the CD add-on puts on the Jaguar and I think it's a pretty open and shut case.

Also remember that Zero 5 is flat shaded 256 colour mode as well.

[Christos]

Ya, ya....I deserve that...lol. I am aware of the difference between the levels of Zero 5 on the STe/Falcon and those of the Jaguar. I own Jaguar Zero 5 and have been a subscriber to Falcon030's youtube channel for years and have watched the video of STe/Falcon version of Zero 5 numerous times. I know the levels in Zero 5 are different, but the core concept of the game is the same and they both have the turret levels, which are similar. The Jaguar Power Pad part of my post was a stretch on my part and didn't really make my point..lol.

 

I really enjoy Zero 5 and think it is a really unique shooter. Like I said earlier, the speed at which Zero 5 pushes around polygons is impressive. I still think that games like Iron Soldier 2, Battemorph, Battlesphere and Skyhammer push the Jaguar more and look more impressive.

 

Well the main difference is.. that the one is first person view and the other is third. They are very different games. They have some similar concepts but that's about it...

[Atari_Owl]

On the subject of Tomb Raider.

 

Whilst i've never played it (the first game), i have had the misfortune of playing Tomb Raider II on PS1. The first level of which has possibly the worst texturing i've ever seen.

 

Also people seem to be talking as if it has a high frame rate. I don't have my measures to hand (it is some time ago now), but i seem to remember it being consistently around 15-20fps, dropping as low as 12.5 at times.

i think i also measured the N64 zelda games but i dont remember whether i posted the results here or JSII.. does anyone recall?

[Bill Loguidice]

On the subject of Tomb Raider.

 

Whilst i've never played it (the first game), i have had the misfortune of playing Tomb Raider II on PS1. The first level of which has possibly the worst texturing i've ever seen.

 

Also people seem to be talking as if it has a high frame rate. I don't have my measures to hand (it is some time ago now), but i seem to remember it being consistently around 15-20fps, dropping as low as 12.5 at times.

i think i also measured the N64 zelda games but i dont remember whether i posted the results here or JSII.. does anyone recall?

 

The thing with the Tomb Raider games is that they're up and down in terms of quality depending upon the entry in the series, so there's not much point picking out one of the poorer entries and talking about the frame rate. A poorly implemented game is a poorly implemented game, period. In the PlayStation's favor is its immense library, where even if you have a stinker here and there, you have another handful of games that aren't. It's kind of like a self correcting mechanism. Even an otherwise stellar game like the original Ridge Racer on the PlayStation can look downright primitive in comparison to the updated version released just

four years later that was included as a bonus of all things with R4: Ridge Racer Type 4.

 

A platform like the Jaguar on the other hand arguably has a majority of stinkers and not enough depth in its library or enough time on market to make up for it, e.g., we didn't get something like a Fight for Life 2 or a Checkered Flag 2. The discussion remains though how much could really have ultimately been improved, particularly with some of the console's known bottlenecks.

[Atari_Owl]

Bill, i have no idea if TRII is one of the poorer entries or not. All i know is that that particular game was exceptionally ugly and had a low fps.

 

Edit: Actually people seem to think its one of the best ones

http://www.thetoptens.com/best-tomb-raider-games/

Edited January 23, 2015 by Atari_Owl

[Bill Loguidice]

Bill, i have no idea if TRII is one of the poorer entries or not. All i know is that that particular game was exceptionally ugly and had a low fps.

 

Understood, but I don't know how that's relevant to this discussion. We were talking about Tomb Raider not being possible in any recognizable form on the Jaguar. In discussing even the PS1 version of Tomb Raider, we acknowledged its relative performance issues. Certainly as subsequent Tomb Raider games, both good and bad, added more features and became more sophisticated, the tiniest possibility of it being replicated on systems in any form not expressly designed for 3D (or, in the PC versions's case, able to brute force a software renderer for those without 3D cards at the time) goes down even further.

[+save2600]

Oh, we got a Checkered Flag 2 alright.... they just decided to name it World Tour Racing instead.

[Atari_Owl]

There are certainly many MANY PS1 games that the Jaguar could not get near in any recognisable form... not even a fraction.

I'm just not entrely sure Tomb Raider is one of them.

[Bill Loguidice]

There are certainly many MANY PS1 games that the Jaguar could not get near in any recognisable form... not even a fraction.

I'm just not entrely sure Tomb Raider is one of them.

 

As discussed earlier in the thread, if there was ANY evidence, ANY inkling, of the Jaguar being able to pull off something remotely Tomb Raider-like in an actual game (and particularly one running off of CD, which creates further performance issues for the system), we might have some basis of an argument for the possibility. Since no one has been able to come up with anything as of yet, for many of us, it just doesn't seem plausible. As was stated many times, we didn't even get an acceptable Alone in the Dark-like game to use as an example, not to mention something many times more performance intensive like a Tomb Raider.

[Bill Loguidice]

Oh, we got a Checkered Flag 2 alright.... they just decided to name it World Tour Racing instead.

 

Stupid me, I meant "Club Drive 2." For all its warts, Checkered Flag is the far lesser of the two evils.

[Atari_Owl]

Admittedly no games, i'd like to think some tech demo work. Or at least part of the engine.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Atari_Owl

[Bill Loguidice]

Admittedly no games, i'd like to think some tech demo work. Or at least part of the engine.

 

From my perspective, tech demos often do things that you don't get to do in games for various reasons, including once you code in all of the stuff that a real game actually needs (AI, for one), the performance profile usually changes dramatically.

[Atari_Owl]

Although enemy AI was certainly not coded, much of the necessary mechanics were in the engine. All the body parts were being transformed independently. The collision detection code was running even if the control was not reacting to detected collisions. Sound was running and in addition i deliberately set routines to use a lot of cycles as a load to try to simulate the load that AI routines might incur.

[Bill Loguidice]

By the way, if you're referring to "Project Owl," as an example, while I think it's lovely and impressive and all of that, it still doesn't demonstrate either an Alone in the Dark- or Tomb Raider-like experience. It's something else entirely, more like a better looking variant of Towers II. Did you have another tech demo in mind? (I'd certainly like to see it)

[Atari_Owl]

There is certainly massively more happening on screen than in Alone in the Dark and more complex interaction of components..

 

The intention was to be closer to TR than Towers.

 

The individual body part transformation matrices had not been defined, but each part was capable of moving. There were no sprites.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Atari_Owl

[Bill Loguidice]

There is certainly massively more happening on screen than in Alone in the Dark and more complex interaction of components..

 

The intention was to be closer to TR than Towers.

 

The individual body part transformation matrices had not been defined, but each part was capable of moving. There were no sprites.

 

But it's not Tomb Raider without a reasonable sense of speed in movement and a quick camera. Even in your demo, there's no sense of speed. There's really nothing in this that makes me think of Tomb Raider. It's not an insult to say it's a nicer looking Towers II. After all, the only Towers II-like game we have on the Jaguar is Towers II.

 

Is "Project Owl" targeted to cartridge or CD? If it's the former, I would think you'd have a constrained world due to space limitations. If it's the latter, I would think you'd run into memory/bandwidth issues.

[Atari_Owl]

My frame rate was as good or better than TRII and i can certainly swing the camera around as much as we like.Thats the easiest thing in the world, its just changing a matrix.

 

I chose a slow pace in order to show the passage of time and lighting in the exterior and in order not to rush out of the room in the interiors, but its simple enough to race across the ground or run through the rooms. In fact if one had been at the UK and Euro JagFests where it was demo'd merely pressing the 'run' button speeded things up to possibly what you wanted to see. 8 times faster i think i dont really remember. Its a long time since i touched any of this.

 

The intention was a basic Cart version (barely textured) with additional data loaded from CD if available. Do you imagine such limitations were not considered?

Edited January 23, 2015 by Atari_Owl

[Bill Loguidice]

Fair enough, but the demo doesn't reflect that, nor does the main character do anything or interact with any enemies. We can only go by what's presented to us.

[Atari_Owl]

Didnt get around to that.

Most of the bits and pieces are in place they just dont interact.

To move the character it required definition of animation matrices. I never did them.

 

Its certainly not a game at the point i stopped but there is a lot going on there.. and my renderer is many many times faster than the Atari one.

 

But i think i learned enough that i dont think Alone in the Dark would have been a stretch with regards performance.

Nor do i consider Tomb Raider the most unreasonable game that could have been mentioned, it would not have been easy, and there would have been significant compromises but i think it could have been recognisable...

 

although perhaps i'd rather not...

 

mmm TRII

 

 

 

Edit: One can also hide a multitude of sins when one moves the camera quickly as you would have preferred it, iIncluding some very ugly texture mapping. AOP shows much less texture warp and.. where it could be done effectively is perspective correct.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Atari_Owl

[Bill Loguidice]

although perhaps i'd rather not...

 

mmm TRII

 

(picture snipped)

 

 

One out of context screenshot does not a point make. You can see in this video how good it can look in places, despite the somewhat wonky framerate and texture tearing: http://youtu.be/1T7ueLPuq94?t=6m13s

 

I don't think you give the game enough credit from a technical standpoint, even if it's one of the weaker entries in the series.

[sh3-rg]

Bill, i have no idea if TRII is one of the poorer entries or not. All i know is that that particular game was exceptionally ugly and had a low fps.

 

Were you LTTP with TR2? At the time, the only real criticism I remember was that it wasn't like the original in certain ways. Plenty of games back then had a little slowdown and certain graphical issues, but we often accepted it despite coming from the 50/60Hz slickness of the prior consoles, simply because it was a vastly different experience playing all these amazing textured polygon games. Just seems an odd one to pick out of all the games I remember from back then.