Author Topic: Hypothetical PCE port :: Flame Zapper Kotsujin  (Read 2967 times)

Michirin9801

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 589
Re: Hypothetical PCE port :: Flame Zapper Kotsujin
« Reply #60 on: April 21, 2017, 09:22:09 AM »
Is not so small, but completely disorganised, each of us works in his corner because (maybe i'am wrong) we are so different in our respective approach of how to code a game/demo,and work together is really difficult .
Oh I see...

The Genesis is also just about the easiest of the 16-bit consoles to develop for. The 68k CPU is a breeze to do basic programming for. The PCE is a niche platform in the west and is harder to develop for than the Genesis. Notice there's only so much SNES homebrew (for much the same reason). I'd say the PCE scene is almost competitive.
Yeah I get that, the MD is nice and all, but honestly, the PCE is the most attractive system to me without that 4 palette bottleneck, with that brilliant little soundchip which is just the most fun chip to make music for, and with that single BG layer which invites me to cram as much parallax in it as humanly possible and see how far I could potentially push it, so the idea that when I get to making a PCE game it might just not get made and I'll have to keep it on Windows saddens me...
But I'll talk more about it by 2019 which is probably when I'll even be ready to do anything... Hopefully by then the scene will have flourished!

Arkhan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14142
  • Fuck Elmer.
    • Incessant Negativity Software
Re: Hypothetical PCE port :: Flame Zapper Kotsujin
« Reply #61 on: April 21, 2017, 02:57:35 PM »
The other thing is that the different time zones and spread out nature of all of us doesn't help.

It really isn't a great time to work with other people on development when you have to play e-mail tag because they live in another time zone and are asleep when you're awake.

It further slows things down. 

The thing that I think we (Aetherbyte) did right with all of this is that we started smaller and just sort of f*cked around and made stuff.   

Coming into things with a first-time idea that is something that could compete with a Hudson/Red game on paper is not really the best way to get started.   It's setting yourself up for failure immediately. 

None of us here have even proven that we're capable of something like that.   I know for a fact that games like Xymati and PC Gunjin would involve a lot of effort and technical work.

Atlantean as a game lays alot of ground work for a game like that, and I know it could be done, but I also know that Atlantean could use some re-working before something like that occurs.

Before Konami wrote their great games, they had a bunch of doofy shit that rarely gets talked about.

Same with Capcom, Falcom, etc.

People seem to forget this.

[Fri 19:34]<nectarsis> been wanting to try that one for awhile now Ope
[Fri 19:33]<Opethian> l;ol huge dong

I'm a max level Forum Warrior.  I'm immortal.
If you're not ready to defend your claims, don't post em.

touko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 953
Re: Hypothetical PCE port :: Flame Zapper Kotsujin
« Reply #62 on: April 21, 2017, 09:34:08 PM »
Quote
The other thing is that the different time zones and spread out nature of all of us doesn't help.
Yes this add some difficulty,and don't help at all  :?
« Last Edit: April 22, 2017, 04:37:54 AM by touko »

spenoza

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2751
Re: Hypothetical PCE port :: Flame Zapper Kotsujin
« Reply #63 on: April 22, 2017, 08:08:37 AM »
You could attribute at least some of that to not fully understanding the hardware. At least around here we know what it can do and can swap code optimization techniques.
<a href="http://www.pcedaisakusen.net/2/34/103/show-collection.htm" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">My meager PC Engine Collection so far.</a><br><a href="https://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">PC Engine Software Bible</a><br><a href="http://www.racketboy.com/forum/" c