Thomas Jentzsch Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 While the GCC version has a spiffier title screen and plays faster, it's really hard to call it the superior version. Both versions have their pros and cons, and in the end it's all a matter of your own personal taste. Indeed. So which version do you prefer and why? And how would an optimal, "best of both worlds" version look like? The linked AtariProtos website already shows a nice comparison and list of difference details. And I can add more: The mushrooms in the GCC protos require only 3 shots to be eliminated. Atari's version and the arcade require 4. The controls in the GCC proto suck, because they are not responsive enough. While the GCC player looks nicer, its movement is much coarser than the Atari version ...what else...? BTW: Please ignore are technical flaws of the GCC prototypes, I am pretty sure those can be fixed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maiki Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 If Centipede drove you buggy the Atari Millipede is sure to raid your brain... I did not even know that there was "another" version of Millipede. Both of them look and behave suspiciously similar and that's why it does not make sence to keep both of them in my Harmony. While the GCC prototype has nice multicolored mushrooms and some of the sound effects are perhaps more polished, the Atari version has much smoother player vertical movement and really burns the TIA to the max... screen constantly filled from top to bottom, from bottom to top Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramses Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Personally, I prefer the grey lower area over blue and the enemy sprites we got in the released version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feralstorm Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 The biggest bother I see in the GCC version is the use of a player object for the player's blaster and forces it to follow the same movement rules as the bugs and other player objects in that display kernel (all vertical motion goes in 'steps' that correspond with the mushroom rows). Presumably that's why the ball (I think) was used for the player's ship for the other versions - to allow free movement without over-stressing the kernel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impaler_26 Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 I prefer the released version. The GCC version has some nice touches (especially the title screen) but the released version is much more fun to play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jentzsch Posted January 15, 2016 Author Share Posted January 15, 2016 I prefer the released version. The GCC version has some nice touches (especially the title screen) but the released version is much more fun to play. Why is the released version is much more fun to play? (e.g. better controls, nicer difficulty...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jentzsch Posted January 15, 2016 Author Share Posted January 15, 2016 Personally, I prefer the grey lower area over blue and the enemy sprites we got in the released version. Within Stella, press CTRL+F until you get to NTSC 50 mode. Then you can see the colors, which are meant to be used. But in a final version, I suppose they would have given some polishing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jentzsch Posted January 15, 2016 Author Share Posted January 15, 2016 The biggest bother I see in the GCC version is the use of a player object for the player's blaster and forces it to follow the same movement rules as the bugs and other player objects in that display kernel (all vertical motion goes in 'steps' that correspond with the mushroom rows). Presumably that's why the ball (I think) was used for the player's ship for the other versions - to allow free movement without over-stressing the kernel Yes, that's why they used the ball. It definitely moves much smoother vertically. But what is the benefit of being able to position the player between two rows? IMO that makes it even more vulnerable. Or is it more a matter of controls? That you cannot really predict in the GCC version, when the player moves a row (note that it moves down at double speed vs up; no clue why, maybe experimental code to show both speeds). Here definitely agree, but that's IMO mainly due to the lousy current controller code. It allows movement only at certain frames, so and movement faces some delay and a quick direction push on the joystick may get ignored completely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynxpro Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 What about taking some of the graphics and sound from the GCC prototype and add it to the [otherwise superior] Atari version? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feralstorm Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 (edited) Yes, that's why they used the ball. It definitely moves much smoother vertically. But what is the benefit of being able to position the player between two rows? IMO that makes it even more vulnerable. Or is it more a matter of controls? That you cannot really predict in the GCC version, when the player moves a row (note that it moves down at double speed vs up; no clue why, maybe experimental code to show both speeds). Here definitely agree, but that's IMO mainly due to the lousy current controller code. It allows movement only at certain frames, so and movement faces some delay and a quick direction push on the joystick may get ignored completely. Can't really say on the gameplay, as I've only seen videos and stills so far. It may be just the perceptual expectation - when something is allowed free movement in two axes, it's reasonable to expect the motion to work roughly the same way along those axes. I'd have to try out the GCC to see how it goes in practice though. I wonder how possible it would be to modify the width/position of the ball per scanline to get a less block-shaped blaster in the Atari version. Edited January 16, 2016 by Feralstorm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempest Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 Indeed. So which version do you prefer and why? And how would an optimal, "best of both worlds" version look like? The linked AtariProtos website already shows a nice comparison and list of difference details. And I can add more: The mushrooms in the GCC protos require only 3 shots to be eliminated. Atari's version and the arcade require 4. The controls in the GCC proto suck, because they are not responsive enough. While the GCC player looks nicer, its movement is much coarser than the Atari version ...what else...? BTW: Please ignore are technical flaws of the GCC prototypes, I am pretty sure those can be fixed. I'll add that info to my page. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maiki Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 Objects should always move pixel per pixel if possible. It is just a matter of principle. A proof that the system has the ability to draw the screen properly... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maiki Posted January 24, 2016 Share Posted January 24, 2016 In the end I have decided to add the GCC version to my Harmony as well. There is something positive on the restricted vertical movement of the player and I really like the multicolored mushrooms and sound effects. So now, it is the only prototype I have in there... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynxpro Posted January 24, 2016 Share Posted January 24, 2016 In the end I have decided to add the GCC version to my Harmony as well. There is something positive on the restricted vertical movement of the player and I really like the multicolored mushrooms and sound effects. So now, it is the only prototype I have in there... But does it have native Trak-Ball support? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maiki Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Is track ball control really that great? I don't know but I remember that it did not feel anywhere near as good as mouse, when I played the Centipede arcade machine with track ball 2 years back. I can't even imagine a track ball in digital joystick mode... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jentzsch Posted January 25, 2016 Author Share Posted January 25, 2016 Is track ball control really that great? I don't know but I remember that it did not feel anywhere near as good as mouse, when I played the Centipede arcade machine with track ball 2 years back. I can't even imagine a track ball in digital joystick mode... Trak-Ball or mouse are about the same. The control is precise for both. And you can play the Trak-Ball hacks with an Atari ST or Amiga mouse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynxpro Posted January 25, 2016 Share Posted January 25, 2016 Trak-Ball or mouse are about the same. The control is precise for both. And you can play the Trak-Ball hacks with an Atari ST or Amiga mouse. Wait…did I miss something? Did you guys already hack the GCC version? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jentzsch Posted January 25, 2016 Author Share Posted January 25, 2016 Nope. In its current state not worth it, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.