PCEngineFans.com - The PC Engine and TurboGrafx-16 Community Forum
NEC TG-16/TE/TurboDuo => TG-16/TE/TurboDuo Sales & Trades => Topic started by: Arm on August 06, 2011, 11:34:11 PM
Title: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arm on August 06, 2011, 11:34:11 PM
The programmer Orion has released a racing game demo for the PCE CD with the help of Gregg (menu graphics and music) and myself (intro and ingame graphics.) You can download it here (go to pce section and select games):
There's also a small video on youtube (although the sound is slightly out of sync, the capture having a low frame rate)
(http://onorisoft.free.fr/pce/urc.jpg)
The game has been completely written in assembler by Orion. For the graphics, it took me around a week (2/3 hours per days) to create the tile set as well as the other in game graphics like the racequeen. Anyway, hope you'll enjoy this small demo for the PCE CDRom :)
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: ccovell on August 07, 2011, 03:32:57 AM
Great graphics, but the road is zoomed in even more than the usual blind spot-prone racing game!
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Mishran on August 07, 2011, 04:00:55 AM
Great job for a first attempt at a PCE game. I agree that the view is too zoomed to make gameplay comfortable, but I enjoyed it regardless. :clap: Nice one guys!
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arm on August 07, 2011, 04:01:39 AM
Thanks for the comments. :) Orion handled the programming and playtested the game. I tried a couple of time the demo and although the car's sprite is rather big, I didn't encounter much problem to avoid the obstacles.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: spenoza on August 07, 2011, 04:14:06 AM
If you do plan on doing any further tweaking, may I suggest the ability to turn less than nearly 45% at a time (tap left or right and you only turn a little, hold and you quickly swing out to 45% after just a moment holding the D-pad) and a few additional car graphics so that when you turn it looks like you are turning rather than the car magically and instantly pointing at a 45% angle. What's already there is fantastic looking, and the sounds are good, too. I think just a tiny bit of tweaking and you'll have a fantastic finished product.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arm on August 07, 2011, 04:26:48 AM
Thanks for the comment. I don't know if Orion will make further change to the demo, but I'll ask him. Actually, I had thought about these details like additional frames for the car's rotation. There's also the problem of ram limitation according to Orion, so I'll have to ask him.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: SignOfZeta on August 07, 2011, 05:32:47 AM
Its the China Warrior of overhead racing games! Seriously, I can't see anything but the car.
As far as homebrew goes though, its very impressive graphically. These are talented people.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arm on August 07, 2011, 05:55:30 AM
Thanks for the compliment. :) Orion told me that the ram limitation is a real issue which prevents him from adding more frames for the car. But he said he'll look when he has more time if he can change some elements in order to improve the game. As for me, I had in the beginning lots of ideas like different kind of fx like smoke, detailed explosions and such, but the ram threshold was already reached with what we had. For example, the car skidding animation is made of 8 frames which uses a lot of ressources. I wanted to add more things, but programming wise, Orion told me there's not enough ram.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: ParanoiaDragon on August 07, 2011, 07:06:35 AM
Awesome, nice job! The gfx are great, is Orion looking to make this a complete game, or is it to continue to be a demo? I'd love to have a full game with case, manual, etc.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arm on August 07, 2011, 07:35:52 AM
Thanks for the compliment. :) To my knowledge, there's no plan for a physical release. Orion wanted this to be a fun little demo for the PCE fans.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Keranu on August 07, 2011, 01:47:27 PM
Enjoyed it, the techno was quite good too! :) I actually like the zoomed-in graphics, it's not something you commonly see in old overtop racers and I don't think it really effects the gameplay that much here.
I agree about having more rotational frames. You can use TweenGen for some assistance.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Black Tiger on August 07, 2011, 02:13:53 PM
It looks very nice (the modern looking styled title screen and menus are cool to have in a PCE game) and the zoomed-in perspective is good for packing in detail, but it needs those warning signs from the intro to flash on-screen as you approach obstacles and turns.
Enjoyed it, the techno was quite good too! :) I actually like the zoomed-in graphics, it's not something you commonly see in old overtop racers and I don't think it really effects the gameplay that much here.
I agree about having more rotational frames. You can use TweenGen for some assistance.
That is an awesome tool, but it won't help for the car's frames, since it has 3D angles and not simply a spinning overhead perspective.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arm on August 07, 2011, 03:04:25 PM
Yes, warning signs could be useful :) It wouldn't take a long time to create. Adding more element like frames and graphics would require more ram. I guess these could be included later if the programmer is willing to.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Black Tiger on August 07, 2011, 03:29:46 PM
Yes, warning signs could be useful :) It wouldn't take a long time to create. Adding more element like frames and graphics would require more ram. I guess these could be included later if the programmer is willing to.
They could be a 2 color black/yellow sprite about half the size of the car and simply flash/flicker on/off. Even if space is tight, that should add too much.
Some unusual ones with obstacle warnings like a picture of a giant hole in the road or puddle/oil slick could be fun. :P
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on August 07, 2011, 04:36:00 PM
The opening stuff is pretty awesome.
I'd much rather there be chiptunes in the game though.
Yay other people doing PCE homebrew!
:mrgreen: :dance: :mrgreen:
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: spenoza on August 07, 2011, 07:04:41 PM
I'm surprised the dev hit memory limits. It's a Super CD, right? Well, maybe if the dev comes to pay us a visit some of our expert programmers could help him shave that memory use down a little bit.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arm on August 07, 2011, 11:53:29 PM
To BT : I saw the video. :) I see what you mean for the warnings. to Arkhan : Thanks for the compliment. :) I guess we'll try with chiptunes in another demo. :) to Spenoza :Yes, it's a SCD. I guess it's up to the programmer now.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Necromancer on August 08, 2011, 04:35:30 AM
Nice little demo! I hope you guys flesh it out to a complete game some day. 8)
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Senshi on August 08, 2011, 08:53:05 AM
Enjoyed it, the techno was quite good too! :) I actually like the zoomed-in graphics, it's not something you commonly see in old overtop racers and I don't think it really effects the gameplay that much here.
I agree about having more rotational frames. You can use TweenGen for some assistance.
I think this game looks great but I think you have no reaction time because you are so "zoomed in" on the car. Stuff just comes out of no where.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Keranu on August 08, 2011, 09:07:39 AM
Enjoyed it, the techno was quite good too! :) I actually like the zoomed-in graphics, it's not something you commonly see in old overtop racers and I don't think it really effects the gameplay that much here.
I agree about having more rotational frames. You can use TweenGen for some assistance.
That is an awesome tool, but it won't help for the car's frames, since it has 3D angles and not simply a spinning overhead perspective.
Yep, it can only be used for "some" assistance. I'd run the sprite through tweengen and work off the generated frames.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Bonknuts on August 08, 2011, 11:58:31 AM
I'm surprised the dev hit memory limits. It's a Super CD, right? Well, maybe if the dev comes to pay us a visit some of our expert programmers could help him shave that memory use down a little bit.
But He didn't hit the cdram memory limits.
Sorry Arm, I peeked under the hood (pun intended) :wink: Immediately found 96k 96k of free/unused space in cdram. There are some redundant title screen/menu graphics kept in memory too (putting those on a load system would give that memory back). Car sprites are all loaded in vram, but are also sitting in cdram (duplicating space). Etc. Cool demo none the less :D Kind of came out of nowhere. I hope Orion keeps PCE deving.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arm on August 08, 2011, 12:09:33 PM
Thanks. I'm only repeating Orion's words, but I admit I often feel frustrated with this ram problem. Actually, I think that additional frames could be inserted, but the programmer is too tired/fed up right now with 8bit assembler language to get back into the program. :mrgreen:
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: vestcoat on August 08, 2011, 01:30:50 PM
Nice work! Thank you.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on August 08, 2011, 03:38:38 PM
Thanks. I'm only repeating Orion's words, but I admit I often feel frustrated with this ram problem. Actually, I think that additional frames could be inserted, but the programmer is too tired/fed up right now with 8bit assembler language to get back into the program. :mrgreen:
6502 assembly language is retarded.
Everything feels backasswards. I like z80. :D
this will sound really dumb but he should make this a vertical shmup. its got PC Carmageddon written all over it.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: KingDrool on August 08, 2011, 03:45:37 PM
Wow! I love the style of the menus and intro screens. It's got a very modern look, like Forza or Gran Turismo - viewed through an old-school prism, of course.
Nice work!
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on August 08, 2011, 05:19:18 PM
Yeah I really liked the title screen. It reminded me of Action 52's intro and I mean that in a good way.
Only because that intro screen was the only well done part of that game lol. It was all snappy and hip. It had some pizazz, like this does. I like the fact it animates along with the music well.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arm on August 09, 2011, 12:19:25 AM
The title screen was made by Gregg. The animation timing idea and intro graphics came from me. I made a video with after effects, then Orion programmed the intro for the PCE and finetuned some elements at the same time.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: grahf on August 09, 2011, 01:06:13 AM
That's awesome! It just needs a little more polish, so I hope you guys keep at it Arm.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: sunteam_paul on August 09, 2011, 07:04:22 AM
Darn, it's a shame this was announced too late to feature in PC Engine Gamer.
I get a very LED Storm feeling looking at this...you should develop further.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arm on August 09, 2011, 08:14:26 AM
Thanks for the compliments. :) Hopefully, some aspects can be improved in the future.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on August 09, 2011, 05:18:17 PM
I still want to see the car shooting stuff!
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Senshi on August 10, 2011, 04:39:33 AM
this will sound really dumb but he should make this a vertical shmup. its got PC Carmageddon written all over it.
You just need to cut your teeth on the 65x first, like anything else really. The PCE doesn't have a 6502. I would be pissed if it did. The original model is missing some important addressing modes and instructions. Having to use or clear X register *every* time you access indirect ZP addressing mode is a pain in the ass (and makes X useless or less optimal in specific loops). Not to mention other missing addressing modes. 65c02 and later upgrades like the 6280 are much welcomed over the original 6502. The z80 ISA is OK. The 65x series has much more advantages in the ISA once you get pretty familiar with both. The z80 was my first console processor that I learned to code for (x86 was the first ASM language I learned). It was a pretty easy processor ISA to learn and use. But after learning 68k asm, z80 now feels like a neutered 68k :P
You just need to look at the 65x differently than just an Accumulator based processor :wink: ZP used as fastram actually take the place of "data" registers on other processors. And ZP used as indirect access directly takes the place of "vector registers" on other processors ( (BC) or (A0) or [CX] or (R15), etc). Except you got a shit load more than any of those processors. Instead of constantly load/storing them, you have enough to actually dedicate them to important functions (like on a RISC processor with 30+ regs). And of course if you don't like writing out as many of the fast but simple instructions of the 65x ISA, you can always use macros:
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: nodtveidt on August 18, 2011, 02:12:45 PM
Very cool little demo, would be nice to see made into a full game. Love the artwork, that was the best part. I'm confused as to why there weren't more frames though... being coded in assembly, you'd think that this wouldn't even be an issue, but it seems as if *everything* is stuffed into SCD RAM at once, which is probably part of the problem. Might have been better as a hucard game, imo... would have given Orion more space to work with if he wasn't really going to take advantage of the CDROM hardware aside from redbook.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on August 19, 2011, 09:05:41 PM
You just need to cut your teeth on the 65x first, like anything else really. The PCE doesn't have a 6502. I would be pissed if it did. The original model is missing some important addressing modes and instructions. Having to use or clear X register *every* time you access indirect ZP addressing mode is a pain in the ass (and makes X useless or less optimal in specific loops). Not to mention other missing addressing modes. 65c02 and later upgrades like the 6280 are much welcomed over the original 6502. The z80 ISA is OK. The 65x series has much more advantages in the ISA once you get pretty familiar with both. The z80 was my first console processor that I learned to code for (x86 was the first ASM language I learned). It was a pretty easy processor ISA to learn and use. But after learning 68k asm, z80 now feels like a neutered 68k :P
I don't need to cut my teeth on anything. I don't like 6502 based assembly very much. I've read two entire books and flailed around on 6502.org back in my C64 days. I did a bunch of asm on the C64 with TASM.
It all seems pretty mental. Many people share this opinion. They're called MSX and Spectrum users. Spectrum users are their own special breed of mental (That computer is hideous).
Quote
You just need to look at the 65x differently than just an Accumulator based processor :wink: ZP used as fastram actually take the place of "data" registers on other processors. And ZP used as indirect access directly takes the place of "vector registers" on other processors ( (BC) or (A0) or [CX] or (R15), etc). Except you got a shit load more than any of those processors. Instead of constantly load/storing them, you have enough to actually dedicate them to important functions (like on a RISC processor with 30+ regs). And of course if you don't like writing out as many of the fast but simple instructions of the 65x ISA, you can always use macros:
Again with the "you just need to...". I don't just need to do anything...
I prefer the z80. Everything flows better to me. The registers are friendlier. I also like that the MSX has the z80, the v9938, AND an awesome BIOS with lots of things I can do trivially.
No amount of comparisons to other cpus/tricks you can/opinions about 6502-based crap is going to really sway me. I only deal with the 6502-based CPUs for the PCE. If it had something else I wouldn't touch the 6502. Anything 6502 based annoys me.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: nodtveidt on August 20, 2011, 08:06:16 AM
TomBonknuts is right though... the 6280 isn't a 6502, and coding the PCE as if it was a 6502 is limiting and lame. It'd be like coding for the SNES as if you were coding the NES. I'm not sure I agree with the "neutered 68k" comment when referring to the Z80 though... I rather like the Z80 and it doesn't really feel like a 68k.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on August 20, 2011, 05:29:41 PM
Right but its *still* 6502 based assembly lol. It's got irritating quirks that I don't like. I find the z80 more accessible
of ALL the 6502ing I've ever poked at (atari 2600, NES, C64 and PCE), I do find the PCE to be the best of the bunch. I still get annoyed, but it's the least irritating. Too bad they never released a home computer with the 6280 in it. That would've been pretty frigging interesting.
I have this one book that focuses on the differences between the 6502, 6510, 6280 and 65816 (and maybe some others).
It's a really nice book to give you concrete comparisons of all the 6502 variants.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: spenoza on August 21, 2011, 05:01:10 AM
I have this one book that focuses on the differences between the 6502, 6510, 6280 and 65816 (and maybe some others).
It's a really nice book to give you concrete comparisons of all the 6502 variants.
You have a 6502 family book that actually includes the 6280 in the mix? Nice! What book is it?
well its not the 6280 but it covers the 65C02, which is what the 6280 is derived from.
;)
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Bonknuts on August 21, 2011, 01:33:44 PM
Quote from: Arkhan
I don't need to..
I wasn't specifically and only referencing you. I meant it in a general sense. Maybe I should have written "One just needs to...". It's to anybody that brings up inexperienced or just baseless complaints about the 65x series in general. The 65x ISA is simple, but fast. It's pretty efficient and nicely optimizable. Any problems with the ISA in general (because maybe it's too simple by design) can easily be taken care of with macros. Making pseudo instructions with macros is cake, unless "one's" assembler of choice sucks. If it's not mission critical code, then 'one' should write a f*cking macro if it's too much to deal with - else STHU. Well, something along those lines :)
Anyway, my point is that anyone that's proficient and experienced in 65x assembly wouldn't be complaining about how 'retarded' it is. A book is nothing more than a reference manual. Have as many as you like, it's not going to help you become more proficient. The only thing retarded is the inexperienced programmer complaining about it (there are quite a few out there). Just saying it plain and true. Labeling PCE coding as '6502 assembly' doesn't help your case either. Not that it should bother you any; you like the z80 much better ;)
I tell you what is retarded, though. The PIC Micro old mid range ISA. Now that's retarded. And you won't really understand why until you try and write something for it. Just browsing over the ISA isn't evidence enough. It seriously deserves that title. If you want to talk about what constitutes 'minimal' for the definition of a processor ISA, then there's your case (12 series, 16 series, 18 series all share the same ISA). You don't know retarded until you code for that thing. Else, you're just throwing around the term ;)
Quote
Spectrum users are their own special breed of mental (That computer is hideous).
That, they are. And the batshit insane fans defend that system to the death, too. You should have seen the "speccy is soo much better than the msx thread/debate". But I actually like the charm of the Speccy. Some impressive games for such a limited little system.
Quote
I also like that the MSX has the z80, the v9938, AND an awesome BIOS with lots of things I can do trivially.
But video and bios don't really have anything to do with the processor itself. When you include them, then you're just referring to the system as whole and not the processor.
Quote
No amount of comparisons to other cpus/tricks you can/opinions about 6502-based crap is going to really sway me.
That's obvious.
Quote
TomBonknutsTomaitheus is right though... the 6280 isn't a 6502, and coding the PCE as if it was a 6502 is limiting and lame. It'd be like coding for the SNES as if you were coding the NES. I'm not sure I agree with the "neutered 68k" comment when referring to the Z80 though... I rather like the Z80 and it doesn't really feel like a 68k.
Don't get me wrong. I like the z80 (I recently picked up an SMS and am in the process of making a dev cart for it). I hold nostalgia for it (z80), since it was my first console processor that I did assembly for (not the SMS). Performance comes from register to register operations or just holding/keeping values in registers as much as possible, as opposed to having a fast/quick direct memory addressing modes (or even HAVING them at all). But this is because the bus access is slow. While the 68k isn't restricted to this (it has a very wide range of addressing modes), bus access is slow on this processor as well and optimal code comes from keeping as much operations in registers as possible. Of course, the z80 lacks the number of data and address registers of the 68k (completely disregarding the bus size, register widths, and ALU). And the z80 lacks some necessary addressing modes for some instructions, that would otherwise help it or lessen it from juggling around registers (load/store or stack use). In comparison to the 68x and 65x, the 68k feels like a direct evolution of the z80. So naturally, it feels the opposite when using the z80 (for me, after having used the 68k for a while).
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on August 21, 2011, 02:36:57 PM
I wasn't specifically and only referencing you. I meant it in a general sense. Maybe I should have written "One just needs to...". It's to anybody that brings up inexperienced or just baseless complaints about the 65x series in general. The 65x ISA is simple, but fast. It's pretty efficient and nicely optimizable. Any problems with the ISA in general (because maybe it's too simple by design) can easily be taken care of with macros. Making pseudo instructions with macros is cake, unless "one's" assembler of choice sucks. If it's not mission critical code, then 'one' should write a f*cking macro if it's too much to deal with - else STHU. Well, something along those lines :)
Quoting me, and then using the term "you" implies you are referencing me dude :D. These aren't inexperienced or baseless complaints. You like it. I don't. You're taking my method of expressing dislike for something as inexperience when that's really not the case. It'd be like someone saying "I don't like that pistol. It's retarded. I prefer this pistol instead". When really, both pistols are perfectly fine.
There's some kind of age-gap-vernacular thing you seem to be having trouble connecting and are instead dissecting it incorrectly and making assumptions.. That's all.
also, lets not get into macros. Remember what happened last time? ;)
Quote
Anyway, my point is that anyone that's proficient and experienced in 65x assembly wouldn't be complaining about how 'retarded' it is.
You'd be surprised how many highly experienced 6502 programmers will talk about how retarded it is. Maybe they don't in your little circle, but trust me, they are out there. I've spoken with them at the CCAG, I've spoken to them online, and I've even worked with them.
It's not a matter of proficiency or experience, its preference. If you'd like to tell them they're inexperienced, go ahead. It'd be mighty stupid to tell someone they're inexperienced if they were programming BEFORE the 6502, and started using the 6502 when it was considered a state of the art godsend.
I think visual studio 2010 is f*cking lame too. I don't really like it. That doesn't mean I don't know what I am doing with it. Elitism much, Tom? Seems to be your recurring theme.
I'm very experienced using trackers (Sadotracker, EMS7, CyberTracker, Impulse Tracker, MilkyTracker, Moonblaster.. to name a few), and still think those are retarded also. It didn't stop me from converting some of my tracker files to MML for use in Insanity.
Everything, and I mean everything has quirks. If you can't accept that other people don't share your same preferences, then that's your problem. I'm cool with anyone being balls deep in their love of 6502. Good for them. Everyone's got their favorite.
It's no different than the C64 vs. Spectrum war. Neither one is perfect, and neither ones truly a giant piece of shit, but everyone has their likes and dislikes with each. I think the VIC-II looks like shit and has an ugly palette, and others think it's completely gorgeous. I think they are retarded, and they think I'm retarded.
Preference.
Quote
A book is nothing more than a reference manual. Have as many as you like, it's not going to help you become more proficient.
If that's your thinking, you must not read a lot of books then. Are you anti-reading? There are plenty of books that aren't just "reference" manuals. Reading a book alone isn't going to immediately make you a pro at anything. However, it sure can give you some insight, some things you may not have realized, some things you wouldn't have thought of, and some things you'll be glad you read about ahead of time. Most of all, you get someone else's point of view on something and can think on what they're saying and take something away from it. Welcome to learning.
Quote
The only thing retarded is the inexperienced programmer complaining about it (there are quite a few out there). Just saying it plain and true. Labeling PCE coding as '6502 assembly' doesn't help your case either. Not that it should bother you any; you like the z80 much better ;)
Anything derived from a 6502 is, at its core, 6502 assembly. If it wasn't, a 6502 reference wouldn't do anything for you. That's why I say 6502 assembly in reference to any platform using one. It's easier than being extremely specific. See how that works?
You also might want to cool it with the whole "inexperienced programmer" bit. It sure sounds like you've directed at me at least twice in your post. I know you see yourself as an extremely experienced veteran, and probably above a lot of other coders in the "scene", and that's fine.
I'm happy where I've been (Insanity and its related projects), where I'm at (Retrocade and XNA), and where I am going (???), with coding all of this crap. Plus, I've enlisted help, so any inexperience on my part will easily be corrected in due time. To imply that I'm not very experienced or proficient at this point is a bit stupid man.
Either way, I'll happily admit I am no expert and am always eager to learn some new bit of information. That kind of attitude sets people like me years ahead of anyone being elitist. I love asking questions and digging around for crap.
Quote
You don't know retarded until you code for that thing. Else, you're just throwing around the term ;)
*yawn* Ok.
Quote
But video and bios don't really have anything to do with the processor itself. When you include them, then you're just referring to the system as whole and not the processor.
No shit. That's exactly why I said "I also like that the MSX has the z80, the v9938 AND the BIOS". I thought specifically saying "The MSX" followed by stating the cpu, vdp, and bios meant that I was talking about the ENTIRE system. Thank you for your obvious statement! Where would I be without you, Tom! :) lol
Quote
That, they are. And the batshit insane fans defend that system to the death, too. You should have seen the "speccy is soo much better than the msx thread/debate". But I actually like the charm of the Speccy. Some impressive games for such a limited little system.
I was involved in the debate. I was also in the C64 vs Spectrum, and C64 vs Atari ones, and probably the C64 vs NES one.
The spectrum is ok, but all of the isometric games are lame, and so are all the spectrum ports that ended up on the MSX where the team couldn't even be bothered to make it look less like ass. The hardware itself is f*cking sexy though. Too bad its visuals don't match its esthetics.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Bonknuts on August 22, 2011, 12:16:21 PM
Quote
Quoting me, and then using the term "you" implies you are referencing me dude Very Happy. These aren't inexperienced or baseless complaints. You like it. I don't. You're taking my method of expressing dislike for something as inexperience when that's really not the case. It'd be like someone saying "I don't like that pistol. It's retarded. I prefer this pistol instead". When really, both pistols are perfectly fine.
There's some kind of age-gap-vernacular thing you seem to be having trouble connecting and are instead dissecting it incorrectly and making assumptions.. That's all.
So you're taking the term 'retarded' and applying it in the context of just 'not liking or preferring something'. And that it has no real description of functionality or attributes of the target object? Maybe it is an age-gap-vernacular thing. See, my nieces and nephews use the term stupid (and probably retarded) to describe things they don't like (or understand). But they're kids and that's a kid thing to do. As an adult, you don't say stuff like that unless you mean it in a demeaning or insulting tone. Hell, even my older son of 15 years doesn't talk like that. Retard or retarded has a specific negative connotation. How else would you seriously expect someone to react to such a word?
Quote
also, lets not get into macros. Remember what happened last time? ;)
How can you misunderstand the context of a macro relative to an assembler??? I mean, what is there really to discuss? But hey go ahead, I'm up for it. The only thing I remember about last time is that you got butt-hurt that I called MML's lack of direct command support for ARPs as 'gay' (your word, actually. And I said it jokingly in chat). As if I pissed on your bible or something. :)
Quote
You'd be surprised how many highly experienced 6502 programmers will talk about how retarded it is.
You know, I would very much be surprised if they described it as 'retarded'. Tedious? Sure. Accumulator based being different than the norm? Sure. Even specific attributes being poor design or such. Sure. But then again, people older than me would actually use the term 'retarded' (in the literal demeaning sense) to describe why anyone who would even program in assembly by choice to begin with in this day and age. Let alone for an old-ass relic of a system from 20+ years ago. I'd call those people narrow minded and ignorant. But seriously, if the 65x series that bad that you (not you specifically) have to whine like a little bitch... then it's a best bet that assembly language programming isn't for you. Assembly language by its very nature is tedious and alien and probably convoluted at times. It's a process of forming more complex logic from simplistic operations. Can't stand the heat, then GTFO.
For the record, I don't "love" the 65x or the 6280. I'm just very proficient in coding for them. And I recognize its potential for optimization. It's second nature, therefore I feel comfortable with the ISA or whatever limitations or convolutions maybe involved with coding for it. That only comes from experience (you'll never learn that from a book. And yes, I have a books. And yes, I read books. Really, WTF?). IMO, if you're not at that level then you have no real or valid criticism to offer for the processor. And if you are at that level, let's hear the specifics. Else, it's just people talking out their ass.
Also, there's a reason why people wouldn't use the term 6502 to describe the 6280 or other far off variants. If you've coded for both, you wouldn't link them together like that. People don't user the name 68000 for the '030 or 040 even though they are the same basic 'core'. Well, people that don't code might but that's besides the point. Or rather, an affirmation that inexperience people use such terms more loosely. The 6280 is like 4 levels out. 6502->65c02->R65c02s->HuC6280. The R is the Rockwell version that WDC latter adopted into the 65c02 core. Those added instructions weren't originally there. You don't say you're writing 8086 assembler when you're specifically targeting a 386 or 486. You say x86. Just like 680x0. Or 65x. When referring to the core, instead of the original model. See how that works?
And since this was all based on your alternate usage and context of the word retarded, I guess there's nothing really to discuss. I was hoping maybe you'd give some specific examples of what you liked about the z80 over the 65x. But I have a strong feeling that you have a bias towards the z80 and the MSX specifically because it's not a C64. It's different in every way, including the processor and community. You have such disdain for the C64 community/scene. At least, when we used to chat.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on August 22, 2011, 01:23:52 PM
Tom, when are you going to learn? vvvvv
Quote from: Bonknuts
a bunch of ignorant, elitist, holier than thou bullshit implying I don't know anything and am inexperienced all in a typical, predictable manner rife with grammatical problems because he's too stupid to proofread.
Note the: [ul][li]released SCD game[/li][li]The released Xbox 360 game[/li][li]the MML utility (which originally started as a custom parser and player based off the Develo manual, and then moved to the BIOS)[/li][li]the Retrocade project[/li][li]the chiptunes[/li][li]the upcoming work on the MSX that is currently in progress but on hold for Retrocade[/li][li]possibly a C64 game, Because hey guess what I just scored a sweet C64 setup for 60$ and have been itching to do more stuff, yes note, more stuff, on the C64. Where do you think I was coding BEFORE the PCE? Hint: The PC and the C64[/li][li]whatever else is going to end up at Aetherbyte.[/li][/ul] Sure, I've had and still have help, but hey, its a lot to take on by myself pro-bono until completion, and I'm not too proud to admit I could learn something every day from someone. It's nice to have other reliable, trustworthy sources of information. We're a team, not an egotrip.
While you're reading this, possibly being angry, and maybe replying, I'll be making fun of the stupid things you spew onto the internet with the other people who share my sentiment. They're all experienced asm coders and finish projects. They think you're funny. We still chuckle about you asking someone in an NESdev IRC channel "whats an LP filter?". This was after you waved your audiophile e-penis around and said you're an experienced sound coder.
Maybe one day you will learn how to reply to peoples generalized posts and comments without making condescending personal attacks. I doubt it though. You've been at it for awhile and still haven't learned.
:) How long til you deactivate your PCEFX account due to drama for what, the 4th time?
edit: I forgot. I loled pretty hard at you saying "I have a books". Maybe you f*ck up your grammar on purpose to be funny?
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: nodtveidt on August 22, 2011, 02:16:44 PM
Sheesh, you two fight too much. :P
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on August 22, 2011, 03:01:40 PM
Oh its been brought to my attention, and I'm sad I even forgot it.
Stupid is positive!
as in "that shit be stupid fly, yo".
Fight the power.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Charles MacDonald on August 22, 2011, 05:28:28 PM
Back to racing games, how feasible would it be to have a FMV-type track loaded into Arcade Card RAM and streamed to the display in real time? (or at 30 or 15 fps)
Assume the player car moves within the playfield and doesn't change the camera position. Maybe the track area could be slightly wider than the screen to permit horizontal panning for some false sense of camera movement.
The track movie sequences could be broken down into segments like tunnels, turns, straight parts, etc. and a course is defined by a list of which segments come in which order. Space permitting, you could branch off into other paths so a course could have multiple ways to drive through it.
Also assume we are making some assumptions like low color count or chunky (2x2) pixels to help pack things into RAM better, with sprites used for the cars. The game would have to clip enemy cars against the FMV background, but some 1-bit bitmasks could be included per frame for that (or just do really crappy coarse clipping and update the bitmask less)
FMV games aren't fun, but the Arcade Card has enough storage to do it with a higher frame rate than a straight CD streaming approach I think.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on August 22, 2011, 05:54:14 PM
the question then becomes: will the higher frame rate increase the fun rate?
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: nodtveidt on August 22, 2011, 05:55:58 PM
I reckon it depends on the speed of transfer from the ACD RAM to VRAM, as well as the amount of "screen real estate" you want to allocate to the FMV.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on August 22, 2011, 06:23:18 PM
Maybe one day you will learn how to reply to peoples generalized posts and comments without making condescending personal attacks. I doubt it though. You've been at it for awhile and still haven't learned.
You seem to do a lot of this, yourself. In fact, it is a defining attribute of most fora exchanges between any two individuals, but particularly in niche communities like this one. Yes, his post was extremely condescending, and if it were aimed at me it would have pissed me off, but so would this one.
So can BOTH of you remove the ad hominems (the obscured ones, too, Tom) and, if you're going to continue this discussion, create a new thread for it and go into specifics rather than insults? I would like to know more about the specific advantages of the different ASM languages and their differences, and a rational debate over whether one or the other is actually better, and not just different, would be not entirely inappropriate for this forum area.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: sunteam_paul on August 23, 2011, 07:40:16 AM
Because hey guess what I just scored a sweet C64 setup for 60$ and have been itching to do more stuff, yes note, more stuff, on the C64. Where do you think I was coding BEFORE the PCE? Hint: The PC and the C64[/li][/list]
I would be totally up for doing some C64 graphics :)
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on August 23, 2011, 08:27:11 AM
You seem to do a lot of this, yourself. In fact, it is a defining attribute of most fora exchanges between any two individuals, but particularly in niche communities like this one. Yes, his post was extremely condescending, and if it were aimed at me it would have pissed me off, but so would this one.
See, I don't recall ever taking generalized comments people make and turning it around on them in the form of some condescending personal attack. If I have, it's not very often that I do it. Yeah, I'll go for the throat when provoked or someones being a toolbag, but as obnoxious and rude as I am, I generally don't just start verbally slapping someone around, especially in an uncalled for trainwreck like Tom has done. Its elitist coder ego at its worst, and something that plagues every single dev community. There's a difference between joining in on an argument that has fired up, and creating one out of the blue for no particular reason other than to wave your e-dick around and act like you're so pro you're pushing electrons around inside the machine with your wang.
There's also a difference between debating the topic by doing point/counterpoint (examples, etc)... and debating the topic by basically saying the other persons stupid for not agreeing, followed by talking about how great you are at it, so your view is clearly more valid.
Quote
So can BOTH of you remove the ad hominems (the obscured ones, too, Tom) and, if you're going to continue this discussion, create a new thread for it and go into specifics rather than insults? I would like to know more about the specific advantages of the different ASM languages and their differences, and a rational debate over whether one or the other is actually better, and not just different, would be not entirely inappropriate for this forum area.
Tom, rational debate? lol you so crazy.
My problem is I hate the zero-page and working with it. It's tedious and boring. I don't like it. I like the z80 and register usage there a lot more. I find it easier and more fun to organize and do things. Whoopdeedoo.
I don't see any point in continuing the discussion really. It will go one of two ways:
1) Tom will misread/fail to connect examples/disagree with something, and then say the other person (me) is wrong and stupid since he has issues with seeing things from other peoples viewpoints. If you don't do it TomWay, you're wrong, absurd, and stupid. Thats how it goes. 2) Tom will post a bunch of crap full of fragmented sentences and grammar disasters, and about 4 people will read the thread. 2 of those people will be me and Tom, one will be you, and one will be like necromancer or tatsujin, just to post a lulzpic. ;)
and, I want sewer shark. Give it now.
as for C64 graphics. maybe one day. For now I am just using *gasp* a tracker on it. Despite thinking trackers are retarded, I still use them and make music! I DONT KNOW WHAT IM DOING IM INPROFICIENT AND STUPIDIDIDS OMG.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Keranu on August 23, 2011, 10:50:27 AM
I'm also all for Sewer Shark, dogmeat!
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: spenoza on August 23, 2011, 03:01:29 PM
Wow, what's all this unexpected love for Sewer Shark? Totally unexpected.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on August 23, 2011, 04:57:47 PM
WTF is wrong with sewer shark?!
Game was f*ckin sweet. It still is.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: nodtveidt on August 23, 2011, 05:36:31 PM
My wife enjoyed it. That say something about it.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: grahf on September 12, 2011, 11:34:47 PM
It would be cool to see some shitty FMV stuff on the PCE for sure. The HUVideo stuff from Gulliver Boy was pretty cool, but could the PCE have done better?
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Bonknuts on September 13, 2011, 04:37:33 AM
It would be cool to see some shitty FMV stuff on the PCE for sure. The HUVideo stuff from Gulliver Boy was pretty cool, but could the PCE have done better?
It would be nice to see something written from scratch, for a FMV demo for the PCE. I mean, just for the fact that nobody has really bothered to.
HuVideo stuff is pretty much maxed out as far as bandwidth goes. It uses custom CD read routines (bypassing the system card ones) that directly access the interface hardware, to get faster transfer rates. The transfer rate is ~122k (0x3000bytes per frame * 10 fps). I guess you could change the window size as long as it fits the 0x3000 byte limitation. Or lower the frame rate. What kind of stuff were you thinking? SegaCD has an extra processor for handling the cinepak codebook decompression and such. PCE wastes a good amount of time polling the status register for the next sector to read out (manually). Not really a lot you can do there.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: touko on September 13, 2011, 05:52:39 AM
That's pretty neato! Is it using only the AC memory or is it streaming at the same time? What's the frame rate, color depth, and resolution?
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: touko on September 13, 2011, 06:48:48 AM
Resolution is low, like frame rate, because all is stored on AC, and directly loaded in it before (no streaming) .. Color depth is standard 16 colors .
I don't know exact specs, but this demo was made by Orion_ , the URC creator.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Black Tiger on September 13, 2011, 07:56:37 AM
It would be cool to see some shitty FMV stuff on the PCE for sure. The HUVideo stuff from Gulliver Boy was pretty cool, but could the PCE have done better?
John Madden does full screen HuVideo.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Bonknuts on September 13, 2011, 01:08:27 PM
Quote from: Arkhan
Maybe one day you will learn how to reply to peoples generalized posts and comments without making condescending personal attacks.
You know what? I apologize.
My initial post wasn't specifically meant to be condescending. But we have history and I should have known better. Things end up degrading into personal/snide remarks between us, and that wasn't my original intention. I too don't back down when I interpret something as snide or personal attack. So with that, I think I'll just keep any communications between us as nill-to-fairly light.
Hey touko, I did see that demo. Though I was referring to streaming from the CD. Getting the most bandwidth while still keeping things in sync and without hickup (pauses and such). It's definitely not easy. Cool to see Orion_ delving into AC stuff.
Quote
John Madden does full screen HuVideo.
They scale the vertical res by 2 using an H-int routine, in realtime. So that gives it the full visual frame effect. It's been a while but IIRC, there's no audio and the frame rate is lower in that opening. But I don't remember what the packet size was for the frame. What I thought was cool in that game, is that they have different videos with different frame rate. A few of the small ones were 30fps :D
PowerGolf 2 has some cool FMV. I don't remember if it's huvideo or not, but the opening video is 15fps.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on September 13, 2011, 03:19:48 PM
Maybe one day you will learn how to reply to peoples generalized posts and comments without making condescending personal attacks.
You know what? I apologize.
My initial post wasn't specifically meant to be condescending. But we have history and I should have known better. Things end up degrading into personal/snide remarks between us, and that wasn't my original intention. I too don't back down when I interpret something as snide or personal attack. So with that, I think I'll just keep any communications between us as nill-to-fairly light
Good. Worry about getting on the personal offensive when someone *actually* insults *you*. Not when they make comments at noone in particular. ;)
Now, who is porting sewer shark.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Black Tiger on September 13, 2011, 05:36:56 PM
They scale the vertical res by 2 using an H-int routine, in realtime. So that gives it the full visual frame effect. It's been a while but IIRC, there's no audio and the frame rate is lower in that opening. But I don't remember what the packet size was for the frame. What I thought was cool in that game, is that they have different videos with different frame rate. A few of the small ones were 30fps :D
The System Card 3.0 warning screen is pretty smooth from what I remember.
(http://superpcenginegrafx.net/img/maddensc.gif)
That simple gif has a ton of animation removed. I think that the warning video is silent, but the full screen(ish?) ending fmv has music of some sort.
What's cool about JMDCDF is that it has a variety of different forms of fmv and it's easy enough to jump in and get to some without major gameplay.
I remember some of the clips looking silky smooth. I wouldn't have guessed today that frame rates got that high though. :P
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Mathius on September 13, 2011, 06:16:48 PM
I thought HuVideo was strictly a Hu Card thing.
Edit: Nevermind. A fist bearing a Duomozov ring came out of my monitor and poked some sense into my eyes.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Bonknuts on September 14, 2011, 03:37:58 AM
Edit: Nevermind. A fist bearing a Duomozov ring came out of my monitor and poked some sense into my eyes.
Funny you mention that. I'm currently working on a little demo right now (writing the PC side compression code/utility for the video), for the hucard. It's an animation/video demo. It's nothing special; it's more of a 'me too' type of thing. Anyway, it won't be huvideo but it will be FMV on a hucard if that counts for anything :)
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Mathius on September 14, 2011, 05:27:05 AM
Edit: Nevermind. A fist bearing a Duomozov ring came out of my monitor and poked some sense into my eyes.
Funny you mention that. I'm currently working on a little demo right now (writing the PC side compression code/utility for the video), for the hucard. It's an animation/video demo. It's nothing special; it's more of a 'me too' type of thing. Anyway, it won't be huvideo but it will be FMV on a hucard if that counts for anything :)
I'd be interested in seeing that. :)
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Arkhan on September 14, 2011, 11:14:51 AM
it better be sewer shark or it doesn't count.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: grahf on September 14, 2011, 02:17:36 PM
That'll be cool to see Bonknuts.
As far as CD stuff goes, I think in order to qualify as Shitty FMV (tm), it has to be streaming off of the disk.
Title: Re: URC Demo (PCE CD racing game)
Post by: Black Tiger on September 15, 2011, 06:11:46 AM