Cybergoth #176 Posted March 29, 2004 Hi there! I hope they keep them unchanged (keep your fingers crossed). Would be cool. I actually started Seawolf in order to have a 4K entry ready in case Greetings, Manuel Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thomas Jentzsch #177 Posted March 29, 2004 Another update (v1.09). Fixed some small bugs and reduced average distances between (especially larger) walls. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cybergoth #178 Posted March 30, 2004 Hi there! Well, the speed is non random, but the walls are moving (right difficulty switch = A). Totally amazing what (positive!) difference the moving walls make. You should make this the default mode! Say, I don't remember if it was said somewhere before in this thread, but did you ever try to move the walls at a higher precission (i.e. update them twice as often as the playfield, but only move it half the distance)? I think this'd look less stressfull for the eyes. Another idea I have for the shading: Instead of switching from color to color you could smoothly scroll the other color in. No big deal actually, but this'd be one a little more impressive effect for the compo I think And is this one flickering pixel at the tail of the heli intentional? As is, I'd assume it'll look more like a raster-interupt bug for the C64 audience, than like a tail rotor... Greetings, Manuel Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cybergoth #179 Posted March 30, 2004 Hi there! *bump* (Seems ~ at the time I posted my reply yesterday, the boards crashed, so while the message actually made it to the board, the overview page didn't get updated accordingly...) Greetings, Manuel Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thomas Jentzsch #180 Posted March 30, 2004 Totally amazing what (positive!) difference the moving walls make. You should make this the default mode! Hm, I am not sure about this, the moving walls make the game much harder when the walls get taller. I don't think you can get even close to the highscores of the non-moving version. Maybe that would be too frustrating (especially for those who don't want to invest too much time in testing). Say, I don't remember if it was said somewhere before in this thread, but did you ever try to move the walls at a higher precission (i.e. update them twice as often as the playfield, but only move it half the distance)? I think this'd look less stressfull for the eyes. Yes, I tried that, but IMO it didn't look good at all. The wall and cave movement looked somehow decoupled then. Another idea I have for the shading: Instead of switching from color to color you could smoothly scroll the other color in. No big deal actually, but this'd be one a little more impressive effect for the compo I think Yes, I had that idea too, but I couldn't find an efficient solution. And is this one flickering pixel at the tail of the heli intentional? As is, I'd assume it'll look more like a raster-interupt bug for the C64 audience, than like a tail rotor... I wanted some movement there, maybe you have a better idea? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cybergoth #181 Posted March 30, 2004 Hi there! Hm, I am not sure about this, the moving walls make the game much harder when the walls get taller. I don't think you can get even close to the highscores of the non-moving version. Maybe that would be too frustrating (especially for those who don't want to invest too much time in testing). Hm... but people have seen the "static" variant often enough by now. Especially in the contest, were we have seen two submissions of it last year alone. Yes, I tried that, but IMO it didn't look good at all. The wall and cave movement looked somehow decoupled then. Hm... too jittery? Even at higher speeds? I wanted some movement there, maybe you have a better idea? Hm... I'll try some things tonight Greetings, Manuel Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thomas Jentzsch #182 Posted March 30, 2004 Hm... but people have seen the "static" variant often enough by now. Especially in the contest, were we have seen two submissions of it last year alone. Hm, that's a good argument. And since I want to submit a version with easier parameters anyway, the moving walls might not be too difficult. Hm... too jittery? Even at higher speeds? At higher speeds, both move IMO quite smooth anyway. And currently I am down to zero bytes again. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Happy_Dude #183 Posted March 31, 2004 I'v still got it I just made it over the last wall and was to high to recover from this freefall (I didn't hit the wall though ) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thomas Jentzsch #184 Posted March 31, 2004 I suppose you where playing without moving walls, right? Anyway, great score! But you should download v1.09 now. It fixes a few minor bugs and the number of walls is increased quite a lot. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bjk7382 #185 Posted March 31, 2004 I like the newest version 1.09. The moving walls are a great touch to an already strong mini-game. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cybergoth #186 Posted March 31, 2004 Hi there! Hm... I'll try some things tonight This is as good as I can get it: ... Greetings, Manuel Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thomas Jentzsch #187 Posted April 1, 2004 This is as good as I can get it: ... Hm, IMO the tail proportions are getting wrong now. BTW: How about the second animation? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cybergoth #188 Posted April 1, 2004 Hi there! Hm, IMO the tail proportions are getting wrong now. 5*5 is the smallest grid where you get a good lookin rotor animation done with 2 frames IMHO. If it were 3 frames, it'd work on 4*4, but I guess a third frame is out of question? ##.# .### ###. #.## .##. #### #### .##. #.## ###. .### ##.# BTW: How about the second animation? The top rotor? That one is cool! Greetings, Manuel Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thomas Jentzsch #189 Posted April 1, 2004 5*5 is the smallest grid where you get a good lookin rotor animation done with 2 frames IMHO. If it were 3 frames, it'd work on 4*4, but I guess a third frame is out of question? Maybe it is possible if I copy the graphic data into RAM and manipulate it there. The top rotor? That one is cool! No, the 2nd frame. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cybergoth #190 Posted April 1, 2004 Hi there! The top rotor? That one is cool! No, the 2nd frame. I bet you'd see it, if you hadn't toyed with the preferences of your browser... Greetings, Manuel Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thomas Jentzsch #191 Posted April 1, 2004 I bet you'd see it, if you hadn't toyed with the preferences of your browser... How about a 3 pixel rotor? That would IMO be the best matching size. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cybergoth #192 Posted April 1, 2004 Hi there! How about a 3 pixel rotor? That would IMO be the best matching size. 4*5 and 3*5 might both do. I can try that easily - tonight... Greetings, Manuel Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thomas Jentzsch #193 Posted April 1, 2004 4*5 and 3*5 might both do. I can try that easily - tonight... The smaller, the better. Maybe even as small as 2*3. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MegaManFan #194 Posted April 1, 2004 Another update (v1.09). Fixed some small bugs and reduced average distances between (especially larger) walls. Am I missing something? I don't see the link to download it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Galaga_Freak #195 Posted April 1, 2004 Check thomas' first post in this topic, he has them all linked there Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cybergoth #196 Posted April 5, 2004 Hi there! 4*5 and 3*5 might both do. I can try that easily - tonight... The smaller, the better. Maybe even as small as 2*3. Finally. Ok, 4*5 still seems to be an "acceptable" rotation, 3*5 IMHO already sucks and I don't even dare trying 2*3 (Hey, that's only 6, I repeat, _six_ pixels! ) Greetings, Manuel Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thomas Jentzsch #197 Posted April 5, 2004 Better, but sorry, I am still not convinced. The rotating effect will go away anyway, because the animation frequency is much higher. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cybergoth #198 Posted April 5, 2004 Hi there! Better, but sorry, I am still not convinced. Can't help you with that, sorry Greetings, Manuel Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jedd #199 Posted April 7, 2004 K I'm new here so I just now downloaded and played this game. But I just wanted to say, awesome job man. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Thomas Jentzsch #200 Posted April 7, 2004 K I'm new here so I just now downloaded and played this game. But I just wanted to say, awesome job man. Thanks. Have you also tried my other minigame Splatform 2600? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord