CPCWiki forum

Did this little mock up before christmas and then for some reason totally forgot about it.  I got Count Duckula DVDs from a friend and was enjoying them and then recalled the computer games looked like junk especially the infamous Count Duckula 2 so I spent about an hour just doing a quick mock up of how a Duckula game could have looked on CPC.   Like I said I then forgot about it (had a lot going on at the time) and never finished it so that's why the status bar is so basic and the general image looks a bit work in progress and so on.  And yeah I imagined it somewhat resembling Castlevania in some ways.  Never understood why the real games failed to make the most of the idea of the huge Castle Duckula to explore in and also it's ability to teleport to different locations.

I'm not quite sure what's happening in this mock up but I think the point was Igor emerged from that 'secret' passage of the gray wall to give some information and help to Duckula and then disappear through the wall again.   Duckula seems to have lost a health heart so best go nab that brocolli sandwich before he goes.

Anyways I'm just posting it here now I've come across it on my hard drive, in case anyone would like to see it seeing as it's CPC style.  And below are the Duckula and Igor sprites from the mock up so you can see them clearer and also the front view of Duckula that's not used in the mock up (I always do front and usually back views for when a character turns round in a game, simple flipping from left and right always bugs me).

(http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/duckulanewcpc.png) (http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/duckulanewcpc.png)

That does look ridicuolus better than the original. Love the little details like the "fading" old drapes and the duck-head-bust-statue-whatyoucallit. Of cause just having a background is a huge difference when i think back to the original empty-odd-block-world game.

looks a bit like Adam's family (ocean)

Ok, well as long as it don't look like Count Duckula 2 I'm fine with that.

Nice to see you again here Carnivac...

Welcome back Carnivac! :)

Cheers.

I just had a look at the Addams Family game and yeah there are similarities.  Haven't seen it in a long time but the memory was probably there in my mind somewhere inspiring me cos even has large chunky hearts for it's health like I did too.  Ah well, like I said this was unfinished.  My 'finished' works usually go through a load of revisions and revamps before I'm actually happy with them so things tend to change. 

How did you do this mockup ?

Was it a "port" from 16bit or other (C64) version of the same game or something from scratch ?


you can actually rip the graphics from the speccy port thx to Winape, the option find graphics.

as this is speccy "shitty" port, you will easily find the tiles and sprites in "mode2" (1bpp graphics).

then you can copy-paste those tiles into any graphic program (on your modern PC) and use them as a frame/model to re draw in mode0.


Sad part with "Duckula 1"... the sprites are masked, so could have been in direct mode1 and used different colours from the background (see Strider for such example)


Anyway this mock up looks great, nice use of the grey+purple and dark blue.

Just a slight complaint : the sprites use a bit too much the same colour as the background (Dark blue and black so in a real game they would blend a little bit too much with the background.
look at "igor" the butler...Count duckula on the other hand has a lot of extra colours so it is good anyway.

Also, good old CPC palette lack the few extra shade needed to get this background more properly separated anyway.

QuoteI just had a look at the Addams Family game and yeah there are similarities.

actually the "mansion" setting is a part of the similarity.

Basically those games are Jet Set Willy clones.

Quote from: MacDeath on 06:44, 04 June 12
How did you do this mockup ?

Was it a "port" from 16bit or other (C64) version of the same game or something from scratch ?

From scratch.  I don't do 'ports'.  Even past Bubble Bobble, R-Type and Switchblade Mode 0 mock ups I've pixelled it mostly all from scratch just using the originals as detail references to to make the most of the CPC resolution and colors.  A couple of the tiles are based on previous projects of mine.  Also used a lot of reference screenshots from the TV show itself for the characters and some other tiles.

Quoteyou can actually rip the graphics from the speccy port thx to Winape, the option find graphics. as this is speccy "shitty" port, you will easily find the tiles and sprites in "mode2" (1bpp graphics). then you can copy-paste those tiles into any graphic program (on your modern PC) and use them as a frame/model to re draw in mode0.

Wouldn't waste my time ripping crap graphics and I prefer doing everything myself anyways.

Quote
Anyway this mock up looks great, nice use of the grey+purple and dark blue.

Just a slight complaint : the sprites use a bit too much the same colour as the background (Dark blue and black so in a real game they would blend a little bit too much with the background.
look at "igor" the butler...Count duckula on the other hand has a lot of extra colours so it is good anyway.

Not a big problem when animated and moving about the screen and Duckula's the focus anyways.  Also there were other colored background tiles (I had a green room that was not finished enough to be presentable).

QuoteBasically those games are Jet Set Willy clones.

I had a go on Addams Family last night and it's quite good fun.  I dunno if I'd call it a Jet Set Willy clone.  Feels very different and I loathed JSW and Manic Miner.

QuoteI had a go on Addams Family last night and it's quite good fun.  I dunno if I'd call it a Jet Set Willy clone.  Feels very different and I loathed JSW and Manic Miner.

Well, the Jet Set Willy aspect is concerning the fact they have no scrolling... and you have to explore a huge "mansion/castle" map and collect items.

Of course Addams Family is more modern in every way, having too some Mario Bros aspect (except for the scrolling perhaps) and feeling.

Lovely Duckula mock-up ! :)

Quote from: Carnivac on 09:23, 04 June 12From scratch.  I don't do 'ports'. 
Even past Bubble Bobble, R-Type and Switchblade Mode 0 mock ups I've pixelled it mostly all from scratch just using the originals as detail.
Wouldn't waste my time ripping crap graphics and I prefer doing everything myself anyways.

Your R-Type mockup was an arcade fast-resize with color decrease and cleaning pixels. Only the "score/beam" bottom part was full done.
Is that "using the originals as detail" and not a port?

By the way, I love your from scratch works and the famous "BATTLE OVER CYBER CITY" make me dream always today.
Waiting the game since...  ;D

Quote from: TotO on 11:36, 04 June 12
Lovely Duckula mock-up ! :)

Your R-Type mockup was an arcade fast-resize with color decrease and cleaning pixels. Only the "score/beam" bottom part was full done.
Is that "using the originals as detail" and not a port?

Was some time ago (November 2005) but I remember crafting most of that from scratch while looking at a screenshot of the arcade game as reference (particularly the R-9 ship cos I had several different versions I did of that, some of which were resized from the original but I wasn't happy with how they looked so I just crafted it from scratch).  I prefer working from scratch as I enjoy the technical aspects of creating a sprite to suit the system requirements and find it extremely messy to just quickly convert someone else's sprites that were intended for a completely different system.  The only 'fast-resize/cleaning up' I recall doing was on the red enemy ships cos they were all seperate frames of 'spinning' and gave me a bit of a headache to do those accurately.  And I think possibly the explosion but I was never happy with that (or the large powered up beam sprite which I did from scratch) and was going to redo those but didn't get the time.  No point these days what with the lovely R-Type CPC remake.  I find it amusing that I did mock ups of R-Type and Bubble Bobble and now in 2012 we actually have fantastic remade versions of those games available on CPC.  I wish I'd had a hand in them.  I did get an email about R-Type back when that project was in it's infancy but I didn't have the time and felt I wasn't needed cos the sample shots I saw already looked far better than what I could do.  :)

Quote
By the way, I love your from scratch works and the famous "BATTLE OVER CYBER CITY" make me dream always today.
Waiting the game since...  ;D

I just came across that screenshot a few weeks ago while putting a portfolio together.  I felt it good at the time but I think it's been bettered by the recent CPC shoot 'em ups which are REAL games such as the ones by Axelay and also the aforementioned mighty fine R-Type remake.   :)


I just noticed the R-Type link in your sig and the 'Easter Egg Designer' bit on the left?  You're part of that team?   Great work.  Really great work.  I just wish you guys could have done that back in the late 80's.   :D

EDIT: Just found that old email from September 2010 and yup, your username is mentioned in it.  Heh.

Hehe. Yes, it's me who have sent you this email for working on it. :)

I thing that your Bobble Bubble and R-Type mock-up tempt to make the games ; "thank you".
To be onest, I have tryed to make the first stage by starting from your mock-up. :D

And, after using the arcade GFx, my ports look like your work (around 75% common pixels with fast resize)
The biggest effort was to do it clean... And finaly I change the palette for all blue, then "champagne".

QuoteI just wish you guys could have done that back in the late 80's.

Sure... But I only got 13 years when released. :D
It's a revenche, because I bought it and the floppy only work during 1 week... :(

Quote from: TotO on 13:07, 04 June 12
I thing that your Bobble Bubble and R-Type mock-up tempt to make the games ; "thank you".
To be onest, I have tryed to make the first stage by starting from your mock-up. :D

If that's even remotely true about either of those games then I'm tempted to see what other disappointing conversions to the CPC could use a mock up to inspire some talented game creators to produce a quality remake.   :)

Quote from: Carnivac on 16:27, 04 June 12
If that's even remotely true about either of those games then I'm tempted to see what other disappointing conversions to the CPC could use a mock up to inspire some talented game creators to produce a quality remake.   :)

I have to encourage all graphics artists, musicians and coders to focus on creating new games for the CPC, rather than remakes.
Remakes are great, but new games are greater.

While I agree new games can be nice too I wouldn't want to 'encourage' anyone to make anything other than what they'd want to make whether it be a new game or a remake. 

Totally agree with Carnivac (hello mate! Nice to see you again!). Some would prefer new games, some would prefer proper remakes, but why try and shoehorn any development that might take place? Just let anyone do whatever they can/want... we'll be more than grateful.


Oh, also, this thread is a nice reminder that dreaming, and just discussing about this or that and offering mockups and whatnot may have some real-life effect after all :)

Yeah.  Always keen to see new projects appear on CPC even if they're not my kind of genre or whatever, I just like that there's still creativity being used on a classic computer. 

The remakes though please me in a sort of "Quantum Leap" way of righting what once went wrong  :)    At least now when other 8 bit computer fans slag off the original CPC ports of R-Type and Bubble Bobble we have real working remakes of them that show that actually there was nothing wrong with our favourite old 8 bit computer at all and these are what could have happened if the original game developers actually spent a bit more time and thought in really exploiting the advantages and strengths of the CPC.

Count Duckula wouldn't really be a remake but a re-use of an existing franchise.

Having it to be properly CPC games just could not use the existing Speccy engines, it would be so bad.

Getting an engine CPC specific would enable some decent sized screen (128x256 or 160x200... mode0) and would enable CPC specific code optimisation.

for the game itself, if it is a Jet Set Willy "styled" game, so a platformer with no scrollings in 6128 config... CPC can do it well.

But a few scrollings could be nice too.

A bit the way Titus the fox was... except that Titus the Fox (or Moktar's adventure in France) had a lot of bugs and was a bit slow.

titus (company) often managed nice graphics but did mostly shitty games IMO.
Especially on CPC.

Blues Brother is awfully bad on CPC.


anyway, remakes are nice in that most of the job is already done, the same with existing franchises...

To start a brand new thing from scratch is more demanding in the artistic way.

I like the mockup, it makes full use of the CPC's warm palette. I missed the original game though, but it does look like a game in the style of Addams Family or JSW (flip-screen, side-on, platforms).


I'd still like to see the "green room" mockup, even if it's not ready :-)

Yeah, maybe I'll fix that room up at some point.  At moment though I've been tinkering with another CPC project and getting some advice on how to make it a reality.  Oh and I found another old CPC mock up of mine from about  August 2005 I'll fix up soon too.

Quote from: Carnivac on 00:40, 07 June 12
Yeah, maybe I'll fix that room up at some point.  At moment though I've been tinkering with another CPC project and getting some advice on how to make it a reality.  Oh and I found another old CPC mock up of mine from about  August 2005 I'll fix up soon too.

is the project I was going to help you with?

Quote from: arnoldemu on 09:11, 07 June 12
is the project I was going to help you with?

I think that was the Mode 1 platformer with the teenager in the hotel wasn't it?  So long ago now.  I would like to make something of that but no it's not that I've been tinkering with lately.

That reminded me of Billy La Banlieue... (Must have been among the very few people outside France who had it?)

Quote from: Gryzor on 12:18, 08 June 12
That reminded me of Billy La Banlieue... (Must have been among the very few people outside France who had it?)

In Spain was officially distributed, and the second part too. I bought both, because i loved french games  :D

Quote from: SyX on 14:00, 08 June 12
In Spain was officially distributed, and the second part too. I bought both, because i loved french games  :D

Was it really? What was its title? was it translated (I remember some text within the game)?

Quote from: Gryzor on 14:01, 08 June 12
Was it really? What was its title? was it translated (I remember some text within the game)?

1.- Of course, take a look in CPC-Power (http://www.cpc-power.com/index.php?page=detail&num=393).
2.- The spanish title was "Billy El Barriobajero".
3.- I don't remember text in the game, but "Proein Soft Line" (the spanish distributor) usually translated the games. The instruction manual and the cover are translated.

In Spain, Erbe imported the most part of UK games, because that we had a few minor distributors that brought the few games not distributed by Erbe and a lot of games from France. These distributors didn't have the money of Erbe to buy ads in the important magazines, because that they can not compete with quantity or cheaper prices, but they gave more quality (better package, great translations of instructions/game and much more interesting games, at least for me).

Thanks for the nice post, Syx. Interesting stuff.


Also, looking at the screenshots I remembered the mini-games. IIRC, these were actually pretty good! They look quite authentic as well... Maybe I should play it again! :)

Quote from: Carnivac on 12:03, 08 June 12
I think that was the Mode 1 platformer with the teenager in the hotel wasn't it?  So long ago now.  I would like to make something of that but no it's not that I've been tinkering with lately.

Everytime that i see that mock-up always came to my mind a cpc game based in "Supernatural"... ay rock music + pixelated Winchester brothers destroying ghosts, demons, angels, ... pure 8 bit heaven  ;D

Quote from: SyX on 18:01, 08 June 12
Everytime that i see that mock-up always came to my mind a cpc game based in "Supernatural"... ay rock music + pixelated Winchester brothers destroying ghosts, demons, angels, ... pure 8 bit heaven  ;D

Never really thought about it before but yeah I can see what you mean.  :)

I'd been using a revamped version of the RoboCop CPC sprite as my sig image for a while but I've finally found the piece I cropped it from that I was working on back in 2010.  Basically, while I always enjoyed the CPC version of RoboCop (and consider it my second favorite version after the arcade game) I still felt the graphics could be better.  I began a revamp though I didn't get very far.  I thought people might like to see what I did do though.  The top was what I started to do and the bottom was the original screenshot so you can see what I did change.

RoboCop sprite (more accurate coloring, shape and detail using an action figure as reference)
babyfood health sprite
brick walls
window
street lights
status panel (though the gun icons are from the original)
unfinished are the road and city backdrop (I was restyling the backdrop using screenshots of the arcade game as reference but didn't get far)
Everything else was untouched as I didn't finish.

Ok there's no story sense why there's a red player 2 RoboCop.  I think there was a second player in the RoboCop 2 arcade game.  I think I did it just out of fun and it always annoyed me when I went round a friend's house to play his Amiga with him but he'd be playing RoboCop and wouldn't let me play cos there was no 2 player mode.  Then I got the CPC version for my birthday and found it superior in my opinion.  Anyways if I continue this mock up I'll probably remove RoboRed and re-layout the status panel accordingly.

(http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/roboWIPcompare.png)

Might finish this at some point as it's bugging the hell out of in it's unfinished state.  Possibly change it to a night time look for better atmosphere too.  Have learned a bit more about CPC graphics since I did this too so could redo it a lot better I reckon.

And yeah I suck for not finishing Duckula or RoboCop mock ups.   :(

BEST.MOVIE.OF.ALL.TIME.
It's wonderful that this legendary movie/game is still talked about all these years later.
(I believe it is also Eugene Jarvis' favourite film!)

I've often wondered where your sig sprite was from - now we know.
:)

Nice work on that screen, by the way.
I particularly like the traffic lights and the RoboCop logo.

Your skyline is much cleaner as well - it always bugged me that the original's skyline contains all that odd grey dithering.
Was it meant to signify pollution?

Quote from: ervin on 16:07, 27 June 12
Your skyline is much cleaner as well - it always bugged me that the original's skyline contains all that odd grey dithering.
Was it meant to signify pollution?

Heh, thanks but I hadn't finished what I was going to do with the sky (and my buildings look AWFUL in their unfinished state).  You're right about the fact the dithering in the original looks bad.  If it is meant to be pollution then it doesn't work too well.

And yeah I love RoboCop.  Got the figure standing right by the laptop as I type this. 

Strange.  Was gonna load up the Blu Ray for some movie shot refs to continue the work (rather than using the arcade game as reference as that feels a bit second hand) but it turns out I don't have the Blu Ray.  Thought I did.  Ah well I have the DVD.  Plenty good too.

Very subtle changes, but really nice results with Robocop. You totally stayed within the original's aesthetics and gave it a nice boost... congrats!

Quote from: Gryzor on 14:22, 28 June 12
Very subtle changes, but really nice results with Robocop. You totally stayed within the original's aesthetics and gave it a nice boost... congrats!

Thanks.  I'll do a much more drastic upgrade when I have time.  Haven't got much free time for the next couple weeks cos of rehearsals for the play I'm acting in.  We go on in a couple weeks so lots of rehearsals and stuff to do before then to make sure everyone's sorted.

I'd quite like to animate the new RoboCop sprite walking too.

I'd say you're torturing us. Wish someone picked up those ideas and implemented them... :(

Quote from: Gryzor on 14:58, 28 June 12
I'd say you're torturing us. Wish someone picked up those ideas and implemented them... :(

Am sorry.  :(

Fun with RoboCop figuuuures!
(http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/serve_the_public_trust.jpg)
(http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/protect_the_innocent.jpg)
(http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/uphold_the_law.jpg)

Sorry, this is just helping me get re-motivated to finish that RoboCop mock up.   :D

Hahaha! Go for it mate, whatever rocks your boat! :D

in a miniserie (recent one) there was a second Robocop, some sort of roboblack (those americans and their Racial clichés)...

could be great for a 2up player game...

Anyway this Amstrad Robocop had impressive tunes and sounds.

RoboCop (Amstrad CPC) - Title Screen Theme (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwB28ikBZ2k#ws)

and a sweet cool modern "remix" (form both C64 and CPC actually)

Let's remix - Robocop (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbt3RXR1wJk#)

those guitar solos, this bass... ouch I cry and jizz my pants every times.


Also fun to see Wrestlers and Robocop...

RoboCop saves Sting (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yc9FXJT8HE#)

;)


on last :
(http://www.cpc-power.com/images/ecran_titre/1815.png) (http://www.cpc-power.com/images/ecran_titre/1815.png)

i always found this intro page was a bit lazy and shamefull.
Ok, why not mode1 after all, but my point is that it could benefit greatly from a few rasters...
the car doesn't need the pink.


of course the white i added could/should be used on the Robo part to have a better dithering gradiant and highlights (had no time ATM)

And yep, a good old overscan mode0 would be more than fine too.
BTW thiis lazied speccy ported is the only disgrace in this awesome game.
(http://www.worldofspectrum.org/showscreen.cgi?screen=screens/load/r/gif/RoboCop.gif) (http://www.worldofspectrum.org/showscreen.cgi?screen=screens/load/r/gif/RoboCop.gif)


"Dawn"... oh wait, this hot blond 80's chick from Ocean ?
ouch...

it's her :
(http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/162_7693792523_4719_n.jpg)
I am disapointed... :(

Quote from: MacDeath on 18:36, 29 June 12

Anyway this Amstrad Robocop had impressive tunes and sounds.

To be honest I was never that keen on 'that' tune.  The tune itself is nice but it didn't feel quite right for me as the first tune I hear on loading a RoboCop game.  I quite like the level 1 in-game tune but I really wanted the actual RoboCop theme the arcade game and Amiga versions had.   I own the movie soundtrack and often play it while I'm doing stuff so wished the CPC version had more of it.

Quote

Also fun to see Wrestlers and Robocop...

RoboCop saves Sting (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yc9FXJT8HE#)

;)

Yeah I remember seeing that when I was a kid and I'd forgotten about it in recent years until I bought that Sting figure of one of his more recent looks (the one on the far left of the action figure photo with the white facepaint) and stood him next to RoboCop on my shelf and then it jogged that memory.



The attachment of your edit of the loading screen is nice but I think you'd got too much red in the visor.  A much more subtle approach (perhaps a thin vertical line off-centre) might work better as he doesn't tend to have a full red visor bit and the black of the original makes him look more intimidating.  Personally I would have done the whole thing in Mode 0 as it would allow better shading (much more metallic effects with the extra colours and some flesh tone on the visible face area and have the logo in the blue/red double lighting as the real logo often has and I attempted in the status panel of my mock up) and the original poster I recall had some red backlighting to RoboCop as well.  Also I just get a bit annoyed when the game's loading screen is in Mode 1 and the game is in Mode 0 and vice versa.  I prefer a more consistent look throughout the entire game.

QuoteI own the movie soundtrack and often play it while I'm doing stuff so wished the CPC version had more of it.

This said I am also a huge fan of Basil Poledouris (RIP, maestro) and was also a bit disapointed the music wasn't ported from his score.

Robocop had those sweet digital sampled voices, but only in 128k version, which you couldn't have due to your CPc being a 464...

I used to have my CPC6128 plugged into a stereo HiFi thing with sweet basses and the music qre ridiculously better compaired to the in-built mono-speaker.

QuoteThe attachment of your edit of the loading screen is nice but I think you'd got too much red in the visor.  A much more subtle approach

yeah as i told, didn't put time on this one... it was just to show how a few rasters could have been used...

It would need perhaps a couple of hours to get it betterly done...
Sadly I don't think the 464/664 version could afford such extended feature (or like a full screen or even 320x200 screen) because the RAM must be quite a bit short...

but on a 128K version or a "from scratch" remake, perhaps... or some sort of cracktro like new page...

Robocop is one of those games that added a few bits in 128k...
single loading, and sampled voices mostly.
Still better than nothing.

QuotePersonally I would have done the whole thing in Mode 0 as it would allow better shading

exactly...
hell it should have been ported from the C64 version instead of speccy, as usual.

With all those sweet blues, the CPC could have really shined even (especially) in only 160x200x16.

QuoteAlso I just get a bit annoyed when the game's loading screen is in Mode 1 and the game is in Mode 0 and vice versa.  I prefer a more consistent look throughout the entire game.

don't tell me...

it was a quite common "feature"...

1st case : the game is an awfull speccy port in shitty used mode1, but the intro page is a sweet awesomness in Mode0 done especially for the CPC...

sadface because you would have liked the whole game really converted.

2nd case : the game is properly converted, use mode 0 all the way and even manage to be playable and nice...
But it took all their time so the intro page is jsut a fast speccy port of death...

Robocop, Chase HQ, Victory Roads... and may even feature Attributes artefacts.
>:(

concerning Chase HQ or Robocop, you can clearly see the Amstrad and Speccy verison share a lot in the "engine" departement...
but this is a good case of Speccy port done well/not lazy/ actual cross development.



to see the intro pages :

victory road :
http://www.cpc-power.com/index.php?page=detail&num=109 (http://www.cpc-power.com/index.php?page=detail&num=109)

chase HQ :
http://www.cpc-power.com/index.php?page=detail&num=100 (http://www.cpc-power.com/index.php?page=detail&num=100)

Quote from: MacDeath on 19:19, 29 June 12
Robocop had those sweet digital sampled voices, but only in 128k version, which you couldn't have due to your CPc being a 464...

Ah, who cares?  I have more fun just making RoboCop impressions and saying quotes from the films while I play the game anyways.  Much more in the way of 'speech samples' than the 128k version then.   :)

Quote
hell it should have been ported from the C64 version instead of speccy, as usual.

With all those sweet blues, the CPC could have really shined even (especially) in only 160x200x16.

The C64 loading screen was a really odd choice.  He just looked like he was in the middle of some conversation.  And it was coloured really bizarrely with far too many hue changes.  Ugly.  Also the in-game graphics weren't much better.  Why was Detroit mostly pink?


Anyways CPC RoboCop in-game looks to have been done for the CPC itself rather than ported from another and while I think it can be improved on I still appreciate the fact it looks like a proper CPC game and not a port of Spectrum or C64 (it's more competently sprited than the Amiga version too)

Hey Mac!


I'd say, a CPC+ version of the RoboCop loading screen would be kick-ass!  8)

Heheheh! Human-generated voice samples, this is almost as good as having the soundtrack on a separate cassette :D


Also, the Ocean girl... oohhhh!

Quote from: Gryzor on 18:26, 30 June 12
Heheheh! Human-generated voice samples, this is almost as good as having the soundtrack on a separate cassette :D

RoboCop is very fun to impersonate just because of Peter Weller's awesome voice and the way he delivers those lines.  Other actors could have simply done a flat monotonous robotic voice but he somehow does it with a sense of artificial personality that it's not quite robotic and not quite human either.  Perfect.

I'm trying to sprite his car at the moment using my toy of it as reference.  It's possibly the only time I've sprited a CPC graphic where I've actually been annoyed there's not more grays in the regular CPC palette.  But then that's part of the fun and challenge for me.  Just thought it could have been nice to see the car turn up at the beginning of the level and him to get out of it in the way that he does in the film and start walking on beating up and shooting the bad guys as the game plays.

Heheheh! Why do I remember the car sequence in a game too? Was it a sequel or another machine?

Quote from: Gryzor on 14:01, 02 July 12
Heheheh! Why do I remember the car sequence in a game too? Was it a sequel or another machine?

I don't know if it's ever been fully done with him getting out of the car.  Thinking about it more I think it would look cool if the car got hit by a rocket as it drove onto screen and exploded and was on fire (the fire sprites could be reused throughout the level with the city looking more trashed so it's clear there's been a riot) and then RoboCop stepping out of the wrecked car as he does in one scene in the film.

Looking at screenshots on Mobygames his car does at least appear on the DOS version (in a very bright shade of sky blue)
http://www.mobygames.com/game/dos/robocop/screenshots/gameShotId,60202/
(http://www.mobygames.com/game/dos/robocop/screenshots/gameShotId,60202/)
Also check out the ugliness of the Apple II version
http://www.mobygames.com/game/apple2/robocop/screenshots (http://www.mobygames.com/game/apple2/robocop/screenshots)

Definitely the CPC version was one of the best available for home machines.

Damn, for some reason this thread made the Terminator music get stuck in my mind. My brain's totally off-topic :D


But I'm *sure* I saw him coming out of a car somewhere... Oh well!!!

Quote from: Gryzor on 14:28, 02 July 12
Damn, for some reason this thread made the Terminator music get stuck in my mind. My brain's totally off-topic :D

It's not 'that' off-topic.  There were RoboCop Vs Terminator comic mini-series and video games.  I particularly liked the Mega Drive game over the SNES one (the Mega Drive's more 'limited' graphics actually suited it more with the lovely dark atmosphere and metal shine, whereas the SNES one looked a bit soft and pastelly).  I need to get me a decent T-800 action figure sometime to pose with my RoboCop.

Quote
But I'm *sure* I saw him coming out of a car somewhere... Oh well!!!

Maybe he did but I can't think which version if any that may be.

Quote from: Gryzor on 15:40, 02 July 12
I kinda like the CPC acronym... :(

I'm already using one. 

sorry..off topic.  Put most of my post in a spoiler tag to 'hide' it so it don't stand out.

Ya know what?  RoboCop is one of those movies where, when trying to get some useful screencaps for reference, it's REALLY difficult to not just keep watching the scene, then the next scene, and the next until you've reached the end credits.  I've watched it almost all the way through six times in last few days.  :)

Still, my new mock up is coming along very well. 

Carnivac, I pray your efforts bear some fruits. CoPrCo is fantastic, to say the least, so getting anything out of it for the actual CPC would be huge...


PS Oh, also, I love your Twitter avatar :D

We get it, you like the movie :D


Huh, with all this pixel loving, I had this idea of someone drawing many of us in pixel-style and putting us in a scene from a game...

Quote from: Gryzor on 15:09, 04 July 12
Carnivac, I pray your efforts bear some fruits. CoPrCo is fantastic, to say the least, so getting anything out of it for the actual CPC would be huge...


PS Oh, also, I love your Twitter avatar :D

I didn't want you meant by 'CoPrCo' til it hit me and that's quite a nice abbreviation of it to use here to distinguise it from talk about the CPC itself.  I shall use that if you don't mind.

My Twitter avatar?  The Doctor Who one in the green coat and cowboy hat that Twitter's blurred all out of shape? 

We're so off-topic here.  Feel like I should my last few conversations cut from here and put into my Duckula/RoboCop topic.  Feels rude to talk about my stuff in sigh's very cool looking football game topic (again said as someone who doesn't even like football, I really want to play it) .

Yeah, first I typed "CPC" and immediately saw the problem. And, erm, yeah, I don't hold the copyright to that :D


Yes, the Dr Who one, and yes, you're right, so I'll be splitting this topic if you don't mind (not sure if I can merge it with the other thread though, so what title should it have?)...

Quote from: Gryzor on 15:22, 04 July 12
Yes, the Dr Who one, and yes, you're right, so I'll be splitting this topic if you don't mind (not sure if I can merge it with the other thread though, so what title should it have?)...

I'm not sure.  I was hoping it could be added onto the end of my topic but it's up to you what you call it.  You're the webmaster here.  :)

By the way have you seen my site with that Doctor Who sprite not-blurred-all-to-hell, and many other sprites in the series? Is The Doctor Who - Retro Sprite Gallery (http://doctorwho.carnivac.co.uk/) if you haven't.   And if you have... well... cool.  :D


I'll shush now while you do your thing. 

edit: oh that was cool, when I put in the link it actually renamed it as the actual webpage's title when I posted.  That's nifty.  This site's got far better and more intelligent text editor than most forums I've been to.

Fan-ta-stic job with those sprites! Man, your work is really great...


And yes, all links are automagically converted, though it's not the editor but a forum mod that does that...


Ok, gonna split the thing now.

Ah that's better.  All my crud in one topic.   :)

In unrelated news, I got 5 out of the 6 numbers in the national lottery last night.  So close to being a millionaire but given how broke I've been for a long time the £1412 I did win sure will help me a lot.  :D

Quote from: Carnivac on 08:39, 05 July 12In unrelated news, I got 5 out of the 6 numbers in the national lottery last night.  So close to being a millionaire but given how broke I've been for a long time the £1412 I did win sure will help me a lot.  :D

Cool! Now quit your job and start doing CPC graphics full time!

Quote from: mr_lou on 08:43, 05 July 12
Cool! Now quit your job and start doing CPC graphics full time!

heh, what job?  I'm poor because I can't find any work in this little town and the public transport is overpriced and unreliable and keeps cutting more buses (and we have no train station despite the fact I hear the train passing through here every hour).

I'm gonna use the money to get myself driving finally.  Need to work out how much to get all lessons and tests paid for, and a cheap second hand car and insurance and all the rest.   Basically I see this good luck money as a way to get me finding a job outside of this town and make some more money.  There's always loads more opportunities for people who can drive.  Both in work and social life.

Good luck mate, this is a nice push and maybe just what you need :) All the best!

Quote from: Carnivac on 08:39, 05 July 12
Ah that's better.  All my crud in one topic.   :)

In unrelated news, I got 5 out of the 6 numbers in the national lottery last night.  So close to being a millionaire but given how broke I've been for a long time the £1412 I did win sure will help me a lot.  :D

Congratulations. But £1412 seems very little for 5 correct numbers, was the total prize (for 6 numbers) also very low, or did 20,000 other people also get 5 correct? It's still a great win, but it's not enough to get you a badly painted gold C64 glued to a piece of glass...  WERTVOLLES SAMMLERSTÜCK:ORIGINAL COMMODORE C 64 C64 GOLDENE EDITION GOLD GOLDEN (http://www.ebay.de/itm/WERTVOLLES-SAMMLERSTUCK-ORIGINAL-COMMODORE-C-64-C64-GOLDENE-EDITION-GOLD-GOLDEN-/110906554490?pt=Klassische_Computer&hash=item19d28bb87a)

Bryce.

Aw, c'mon man, don't ruin his dreams...

Quote from: Bryce on 10:49, 05 July 12
Congratulations. But £1412 seems very little for 5 correct numbers, was the total prize (for 6 numbers) also very low, or did 20,000 other people also get 5 correct? It's still a great win, but it's not enough to get you a badly painted gold C64 glued to a piece of glass...  WERTVOLLES SAMMLERSTÜCK:ORIGINAL COMMODORE C 64 C64 GOLDENE EDITION GOLD GOLDEN (http://www.ebay.de/itm/WERTVOLLES-SAMMLERSTUCK-ORIGINAL-COMMODORE-C-64-C64-GOLDENE-EDITION-GOLD-GOLDEN-/110906554490?pt=Klassische_Computer&hash=item19d28bb87a)

Bryce.

No.  I saw the breakdown for this week's prizes.  And I'm one of 282 people who got the 5 numbers.  6 numbers gets you the million or so, 5 numbers plus the bonus ball gets you about £150,000.  Five numbers gets £1412 this week.  And I'm happy.  See, I don't like too much money.  Even when I was homeless twelve years ago I never begged for money, I just found my own ways to get by.  I wouldn't want to be a millionaire.  There seems to be little satisfaction after the initial thrill, there's no sense I really earned that much, no real goals to achieve and I have already had insecurities in the past about who I can trust and can't trust and becoming rich would bring those issues back in force.  Also I like to earn my money.  Even when my health got so bad that I got put on incapacity benefits (what they put disabled people on to get extra £25 a week benefits) I argued with them about it and they said just use to help relax and keep on top of bills but I ended up donating most of it to worthier charities.  This £1412 is enough for me.  It's a chance to get driving so I can find work.  The town I live in has pretty much nothing in it.  Hardly any shops and relatively few businesses.  The buses even to the next town are expensive and you're lucky if they even turn up at the hour they're supposed to.  We have a train line here that's in use but there's not been a station here for decades so the train never stops.  I hear it every hour and get frustrated I can't just jump on it.   I want to earn my way but the thing holding me back is the fact I feel somewhat trapped in this place.  On a week where I found myself broke (even selling of half of my Transformers didn't help) and struggling even to pay the £20 cast fee for my play I'm in I'm overjoyed to find I can relax for a bit and plan a way to get more mobile and open up a whole new world of opportunities to earn my way through my own life.  This money is a nice boost to help me get moving onwards and up.


That C64 is very odd.  But then I wouldn't even want to own a C64 at all, even if I was paid to take it off someone.  I already have enough door-stops.  :)

Sounds like you know how to spend it best. Good luck with the job search.

Bryce.

P.s. C64s make crap doorstops, if it's a doorstop you're looking for, I'd advise you to use a different 8-Bit: http://oldcomputers.net/pics/ZX81-doorstop.jpg (http://oldcomputers.net/pics/ZX81-doorstop.jpg)

Quote from: Bryce on 11:30, 05 July 12

P.s. C64s make crap doorstops, if it's a doorstop you're looking for, I'd advise you to use a different 8-Bit: http://oldcomputers.net/pics/ZX81-doorstop.jpg (http://oldcomputers.net/pics/ZX81-doorstop.jpg)

Aw, I actually feel sorry for that ZX81 there.  Used to have one though I never really used it much.  Was my dad's first computer before he bought us the CPC.  Was the CPC that got me into computers at the time.  Probably because of all the lovely colours that caught my eye (mostly on the screen but partially the keyboard too).

It's a cruel picture admittedly, but I also still own, but rarely use a ZX81 (with 16K RAMPack!) too.

Bryce.

Quote from: Bryce on 11:30, 05 July 12
P.s. C64s make crap doorstops, if it's a doorstop you're looking for, I'd advise you to use a different 8-Bit: http://oldcomputers.net/pics/ZX81-doorstop.jpg (http://oldcomputers.net/pics/ZX81-doorstop.jpg)

Argh! The horror, the pain! Why do people do this? Heartless bastards! It's got a Z80, fer chrissakes!
/me faints.

Quote from: MaV on 12:33, 05 July 12
Why do people do this?

Because a C64 doesn't fit under the door?

Bryce.

Quote from: Bryce on 12:46, 05 July 12
Because a C64 doesn't fit under the door?

True.

But if anyone here is seriously thinking about using a ZX81 as a doorstop, I'll send them a wedge free of charge in exchange for the ZX81. ;)

I wonder if anyone's actually built a bread bin out of a c64?

Ironic this topic was moved and had bits of another topic moved into it that were considered off-topic in their original thread that this topic itself is now going off-topic.  My CPC pixelling -->  Storing bread in a C64.   Hehe.

"We are a dynamically evolving community embracing fluidity and change". Or something :D


Yes, you're right, but off-topic posts sometimes hurt more than others. If you want me to clean up anything, there's always the "report" button :)

nah I'm cool.  I'll bring it right back on topic when I post my next piece anyways.

Looking forward to that.

@Carnivac - a man after my own heart - Transformers and Amstrads! Although I tend to lag a bit behind on the latest IDW G1 stuff having just read All Hail Megatron and Last Stand of the Wreckers (still not a patch on the original Simon Furman comic stories IMO). Sounds like you've been through the ringers over the years; hopefully the lottery win will mark a change in fortune. Buses sound as good as the ones in Basingstoke. Half the time they didn't turn up and other times you got 2 at once. Good luck with the job hunt!
This is what's left of my collection. Still kicking myself for selling the like of Jetfire years ago...

[attach=2]

So Bryce, think I have a shot at making some money with my gold C64? I just got to find a better sticker and a glass board  :laugh: Please note the lower ROM board and Megaflash sticking out of the back of the CPC 6128 for extra brownie points....

[attach=3]

Quote from: beaker on 19:48, 05 July 12
@Carnivac - a man after my own heart - Transformers and Amstrads!

Nice collection.  I sold off my most of my G1 stuff some years ago when I was broke.  I only have Powermaster Optimus Prime left cos of sentimental attachment (I remember the great birthday I had where I got him as my main present).  I mostly just have figures from the movies as I far prefer the complex designs and incredible engineering some of the figures have such as the Revenge of the Fallen Leader Class Optimus Prime (I have the imported Buster version by Takara that chromed all the gray parts and turned his lower smokestack bits into his movie-accurate gun) and I tend to paint them up a bit to look more worn and metally.  I also painted up a Cybertron Snarl figure to be my movie/classics version of Carnivac as...well...the original G1 toy is crap.  Charming crap but still badly proportioned, hardly articulated crap.  Furman had a knack for turning poor toys into great characters in the old Marvel comics which explains the insane prices for original Carnivac, Bludgeon and Thunderwing.  I do own Generations Thunderwing but disappointed at how small he is.  And I own the Revenge of the Fallen Bludgeon with the third party Headsrobot upgrade kit for a more skull like face (with cybernetic skull on reverse side), better helmet, and chromed non-floppy swords.  My fave Decepticon figure ever.  So yeah I've no need for the overpriced G1 versions (though I did have G1 Carnivac complete a few years ago).  And yes I've managed to stab myself with his new swords twice... I kinda wished I hadn't wiped them clean.  Authentic human blood looked pretty cool on them.  Oh well, I've got plenty more blood if I want to do it again.

The old Jetfire toy was awesome.  Still holds up well today in terms of detail and articulation.  Never liked his cartoon appearance (but then I never liked the cartoon much itself, why does Grimlock become Barney the Dinosaur in season 3?).  Much preferred the Macross toy design.  Dinobots still look great after all these years.  I'm not a big G1 fan anymore (other than the Marvel comics, I can't be bothered with IDW's version after all that godawful headmaster crud and the travesty that was All Hail Megatron.  I have greatly enjoyed their movie comics though) but I would quite like the Masterpiece Grimlock as it's just a bigger improved version of the original figure which was great to begin with (and one of the few G1 figures I kinda regret selling).   I don't care for the other Masterpiece figures at all since they're overpriced, poorly designed pieces of flimsy crud and Grim's the only one I'll break the 'never buy a supposed masterpiece figure again' rule I have.

I'm babbling.  Just got back from a very hot and exhausting rehearsal.. was already tired from all the dancing about I did earlier after finding out I won that money.

As do I!!!

Quote from: Gryzor on 09:00, 07 July 12
As do I!!!

As do you what?  I don't follow.   :)

Quote from: beaker on 19:48, 05 July 12
So Bryce, think I have a shot at making some money with my gold C64? I just got to find a better sticker and a glass board  :laugh: Please note the lower ROM board and Megaflash sticking out of the back of the CPC 6128 for extra brownie points....

Yes extra points for the Bryce hardware in the picture, but the points are instantly deducted again for for putting a CPC behind a C64!  :o

Bryce.

Quote from: beaker on 19:48, 05 July 12
This is what's left of my collection. Still kicking myself for selling the like of Jetfire years ago...

I've only just noticed you got duplicates.  So Prime in robot mode and also in truck mode at same time.  And Snarl & Sludge of the Dinobots are there twice too (I thought the dino group looked bigger than usual, hehe).  I've done that a few times when I've had duplicates too.

 Hahaha! My "as do I" quip was in response to TFM's "Looking forward to that" (your next creation), but apparently some new posts were on a new page...

Almost done the new RoboCop mock up.  It's... VERY different to the early sample I showed before.

Ok I'm pretty much done.  Tried to go for a dark, atmospheric, gritty look of a street during a riot and the brown/grey look worked better than I thought considering the CPC doesn't have much in the way of browns and greys (more the C64's field but then it doesn't have much else and it certainly couldn't do this).   I used various stills from the movies as reference (even the sky gradient comes from one particular scene).  Also, inspired by my own Cosmic Prison Commando I put in a little text line where RoboCop could say certain things (mostly quotes from the film) in abscence of sound samples.  Hope you guys like it.  It's my favourite CPC piece I've ever done.   

Here it is doubled up with scanlines (as that's how I play CPC games when using an emulator).  There's a link below it to a regular version.  Also see if you can spot the 'easter egg'.  :)

(http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/RoboCopCPC2012_scan.png) (http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/RoboCopCPC2012_scan.png)

Link to regular size version without scanlines (http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/RoboCopCPC2012.png)

Hey loving the artwork. Can I just ask based on the last image. You're using 16 colours. So how are you doing the transparency on the sprites? Is there a colour that the sprites arent using.
Oh by the way that count duckula stuff is fab.

Quote from: Trebmint on 13:50, 08 July 12
Hey loving the artwork. Can I just ask based on the last image. You're using 16 colours. So how are you doing the transparency on the sprites? Is there a colour that the sprites arent using.

There is no need to save a color for sprites transparency on screen , that's only for their storage.Btw , nice gfxs that would be lovely to see all this stuff animated  :D

Brilliant piece of work! Definitely has a Cosmic Prison Commando feel to it.

Quote from: Carnivac on 13:19, 08 July 12

(http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/RoboCopCPC2012_scan.png) (http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/RoboCopCPC2012_scan.png)

Link to regular size version without scanlines (http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/RoboCopCPC2012.png)

Lovely! To the coders, would you need 128 kB or even 512 kB to get a full Robocop game with this kind of look throughout? Or would it be impossible?

Quote from: ivarf on 19:42, 08 July 12

Lovely! To the coders, would you need 128 kB or even 512 kB to get a full Robocop game with this kind of look throughout? Or would it be impossible?

I don't think it would be too much trouble.  It's not doing anything fancy or overly memory consuming.  Even if it needed 128k rather than 64k I'm sure I could have unnecessary stuff cut out for a '64k version' such as Robo arriving in his car, or more varied shop signs.  This mock up is actually very simple when you break it down.

Blimey! That is absolutely gobsmackingly beautiful!
It does indeed remind me of cosmic prison commando.
Just magnificent.

I haven't got a clue what the easter egg might be though.

[EDIT] aaaaand right after I posted, I spotted it.
Clue: 464

Well, if s/o wants to use 64 KB only, then the floppy disc will relad constantly...
Seriously, you will need 128 KB here, GFX need a lot of space.

Sure, if all the game have to look like that, you may have (not sure) not enough memory for storing all tiles, sprites and fonts on a 64K system. (don't forget SFx and why not music too)
And it will be a shame to remove cars, or something else to free memory.  ;D

By the way... Great mock-up to make peoples dream. :)

I'll post the tile sheet for that screen when I get time (busy day, busy week, I'm performing rehearsing and performing a play all evenings this week), there's not actually that much compared to some CPC games I've played and a lot of it would get reused throughout a level anyways (is amazing how even one or two extra tiles in places can give a fresh look to a mostly 'recycled' area) and even in later levels (though I think multiload would be an option).  Only the small green font would have a full set, the orange font for ammo and time only need numbers as does the large green one.  Most enemies would reuse the same leg animation to save space and of course RoboCop himself would be split into two (top half that can aim different directions, while his bottom half does leg animation).  And would the status panel really use up more memory than the huge blocky one on the original game?  The gun's gray box is the same as the one used for the lives and the little tubes are made from 4x8 tile pieces.

With 64K, you only get 4 banks of memory for managing at less :
- One display screen (16K)
- Engine, menu, game code (16K)
- Tiles, map, fonts, attribute array (16K)
- Sprites, sound, audio player, logic code (16K)

If most 64K games look very "simplest", with very few patterns, a poor game IA and lacking music.
It's not because programers are lazy. (hum...)

Just about your ingame fonts, you spend around 2KB.
- Green little font : 512B
- Green big digit font and % : 768B (reusing tiles parts for some digits)
- Orange "amo" digit font : 512B (2 chars to refrest with a part of the gun)
- Orange "time" digit font : 256B

For a simple 256 tiles set for background, it's 4KB.
A game map of "16x256" tiles take at less 4KB too.

Sure, it may be possible to do it with 64K, but it will be not so easy as you though. :)

I'd add some few things about video memory as it is one of the bottleneck of the CPC, correct playfield surface (160*153 mode 0 40*25 R9=5) for correct sprites size with double buffer (avoid flickering and allow hard scrolling): 24K , add the panel like you made : something like 6K.You can already count for something like half of the memory used for video.

Wow, this is beautiful! The scanlines make it rather dark, but it's so alive it's like a screenshot from a living, breathing game. Indeed I'd love to see it animated!


And, heh, great job on the easter egg ;D

Ok we can stop saying bad things about 64k machines now!

Some people will never like them, others will still continue to like them.

The truth is that it is hard to fit a game into 64k, but it's not impossible and you're not guaranteed a poor game. Really it depends on lots of factors.

The values you give there are not the same for every game in my experience.

There are many good 64k games.

The blanket statement of "if we had 128k all games would be better" is not true.

Even 128k games would need to multi load to get more content, same as 64k would.

Excellent mock-up! Can't wait to see the tileset.


As for font memory usage, I see it as not having such a high overhead.
4-colour fonts: 64 characters (including the scoreboard pipes) at 4x8 = 512 bytes, or 32 characters [A-Z.,!$?/] in 256 bytes, and a separate digit font in 80 bytes.
Code routine selects which 4-colours to render the font in. A little slower than storing 16-colour fonts, but saves memory and allows some rendering-time flexibility.


16KB for tiles and fonts? With 512 bytes used for the standard character set, and 704-bytes (44 characters) for the big digits (or drop one of the colours and it's 352 bytes using the above method) we still have a lot of tile memory.
Each tile is 64 bytes, so we can fit 16 into 1KB, 240 into 15KB. I wouldn't be surprised if many games made do with a lot fewer tiles!

Quote from: Briggsy on 13:36, 09 July 1216KB for tiles and fonts? With 512 bytes used for the standard character set, and 704-bytes (44 characters) for the big digits (or drop one of the colours and it's 352 bytes using the above method) we still have a lot of tile memory.
Each tile is 64 bytes, so we can fit 16 into 1KB, 240 into 15KB. I wouldn't be surprised if many games made do with a lot fewer tiles!

The playfield of this picture (removing sprites) use close to 200 different tiles... ;)

On that, you have to add the game map (4K at less) and the attribute table (probably 4K too).
So, you are game over before coding the game. :D

Quote from: TotO on 14:22, 09 July 12
The playfield of this picture (removing sprites) use close to 200 different tiles... ;)

On that, you have to add the game map (4K at less) and the attribute table (probably 4K too).
So, you are game over before coding the game. :D

200 different tiles?

And thanks for the nice comments.  I also really like seeing the posts that theorise how things could work rather than just saying "nope it can't be done". 

Yep.
Probably the fact that you add more pixels after doing the picture to look better ?

And sure, it's very much but it's why that look realy nice too. :D

Quote from: TotO on 14:33, 09 July 12
Yep.
Probably the fact that you add more pixels after doing the picture to look better ?

I don't know what you mean by that at all.  And how big are you counting the tiles?  8x16, 4x8 or some other size (I mean real Mode 0 res of 160 wide, not the PC pixel size)?

Each tile is an unique char. (4x8 pixels in mode 0)
Some chars look close to others, but with a different pixel inside, so you have to count it like a different tile too. :)

EDIT:
- Up left window: 16 tiles
- Up right window: 16 tiles
- Videoshack marquee: 28 tiles
- Brocken shop glasses: 34 tiles
- Background buildings & sky : 40 tiles
- Parc-metter: 8 tiles
- Car (suposed to not move): 38 tiles

Total : 180 tiles without counting walls and floor.

The car was planned to be a sprite that only appears when RoboCop starts a new life (car drives on so it's half way on screen like shown in the image, then door open and RoboCop steps out then walks to the middle to begin play) so would disappear offscreen as Robo walks right.   Could be a 128k only feature if it used too much of 64k and on a 64k version he simply just appears in middle of the screen with no car.  It's not essential to gameplay.  It's flourish.

Fire would be an animated sprite that flickers through the versions shown on screen there (at different starting frame counts so the frames aren't all the same at once).  Works well as background (such as above the fence) or foreground (in front of car and enemy in shot) for some nice depth.  Parking meter would be a sprite so could be placed in different areas. Crate could be a sprite that would be shot to reveal an item.

I could redo the windows so that they use the window pane of the shop's display window and then make then make the windows panes a little taller to have only 2 of the one on left far left (unbroken and broken types).  The lower broken glass on the second from left window could use the shop display window's lower broken glass bits then.   But that's sorta stuff I'd like to do only if necessary.  I did just notice that second window is using a slightly out of date version of the upper left broken glass bit.  It should have a brown pixel like the shop display version does. 
.

Quote from: TotO on 14:22, 09 July 12
The playfield of this picture (removing sprites) use close to 150/200 different tiles... ;) 
On that, you have to add the game map (4K at less) and the attribute table (probably 4K too).
So, you are game over before coding the game. :D

Looking through the screen I'd estimate there to be around 40 different tiles (8x16), although the full level would have more. Carnivac probably could split the screen up so that you can see the tile boundaries. It's the sign of a good graphician that it looks like there are many many more different tiles than there actually are. I'm using 8x16 because that's 64 bytes to a tile, hence 16 tiles/KB RAM or 256 tiles per 16KB. It looks like you can get away with between 64 and 128 tiles per level for a game like this.


The only issue is the shop sign, using 4x8 tiles would let you have an alphabet of potential store names (52 16-byte tiles), but it would be an odd high street with identical style shop signs.

You are right about the game map of course, at 10 tiles high, 4KB could give us a level over 400 tiles wide (20 screens), before we consider any form of level data compression.
Actually, the screen is 128 pixels wide, not 160, so that's 25 screens, and some memory saved (although in awkward places). I'm not an expert on CPC double buffered screen split 128-byte wide mechanics though.

Quote from: Carnivac on 14:58, 09 July 12The car was planned to be a sprite that only appears when RoboCop starts a new life

OK, so don't count it. :)

QuoteFire would be an animated sprite [...] Parking meter would be a sprite so could be placed in different areas.
Crate could be a sprite that would be shot to reveal an item.

I don't count fire and crate, because look like sprites.

QuoteI could redo the windows so that they use the window pane of the shop's display window and then make then make the windows panes a little taller to have only 2 of the one on left far left (unbroken and broken types).  The lower broken glass on the second from left window could use the shop display window's lower broken glass bits then.   But that's sorta stuff I'd like to do only if necessary

The goal is not to ask you to change anything on your picture, because it's great like that.
Just to inform you that it may be difficult to make a game looking like that for real. :)

Quote from: TotO on 15:05, 09 July 12
But if all that need to be sprites, don't count them as tiles... But, take sprite memory and need to be masked to be displayed. (slow)

I thought sprites didn't need to be masked if they were all using the same colour as the transparent one (none of them are using the greeny 127,127,0 except as a transparency, it's only visibly an actual colour in background tiles)

The actual hard things in my opinion are:

1. animated fire tiles / sprites (best as tiles) - can only have a few on display at a time due to the cost of refreshing them. Treat them as background tiles and they can be blitted fairly quickly to the screen, so you could get a few done per frame. Not immensely difficult - you register active flames when they appear on screen, and deregister them when they go off, just takes a small table of 'active flames' (x,y,frame#) in memory.

2. foreground static sprites such as the fire hydrant/lampposts/other flair. Apart from needing to be rendered with a slower blit method to handle the transparent pixels, there is the difficultly of storing these in the game map - it might require a foreground tilemap, or a table of special items, etc. You will not want to re-render these every frame IMO, just once when they appear on screen. That means no fire hydrants in front of animated fires/tv screens/etc, nor player sprites going behind them. I agree that they do make a difference to the graphics. Worst comes to worst, you just have standard tiles including the items and more restricted placement opportunities.

3. no chain link fencing in an 80s american city?! :p

4. Aforementioned screen split, smooth scrolling, double buffering, and maybe need for preshifted sprites/tiles.


Indeed you don't need a mask sprite if you are using a colour key as transparency, which makes sense in MODE 0 as you would otherwise inflate the graphics memory use by 25%.

Is it possible to use the same fire as sprite or tile depending on where it's placed?  So a tile when it's just against the black of the city backdrop and a sprite when it's used in the foreground?   Or is that not possible?

I was thinking of chain linking fences but there was only so much I could fit into one screenshot.  This be the basic tile set-up as an example.  The bricks and stuff that would be used through out a level with some variations in other tiles to accompany them.   Is it technically an 80's city?  RoboCop is an 80's movie set in the 'near future' (I think around 2000 I read some place).  Doesn't really matter what time it's actually set in.  I like those 80's arcade game sort of details.

Finding this all very interesting.  When this week is over (basically when my play is done and I think of something other than Shakespeare) I'll likely do RoboCop and the enemies walk cycles and perhaps reuse my Cosmic Prison Commando PC demo engine to do a tech demo of these graphics in action to see how it looks all moving and playable (that engine has everything needed for this sort of game so it just needs some tweaking, like to scroll left to right only and the RoboCop graphics)

Usage of small tiles does limit RAM needed for GFX, but it does increase RAM needed for the matrix to tiles.
So how much RAM do you need?
- 16 KB for a matrix / map of the levels
- 16 KB for Tiles GFX data
- 16 KB for Sprites / enemy GFX data
- 16 KB for Sound (yes!)
- 16 KB or 32 KB for V-RAM (screens)
- 16 KB (or even more) for the Code managing that all.
Graphics people tend to forget that there must be also some code, and yes it does need space too ;-) And if you want just a bit of AI it will need really some RAM ;-) :-D

Quote from: TFM/FS on 15:56, 09 July 12
Graphics people tend to forget that there must be also some code

I don't.  And I also don't forget that Turrican II ran very nicely on my 464 with it's huge levels, decent multi-directional scrolling, varied tiles and large bosses.  So the 464 is certainly capable of a graphically impressive, highly playable shooter without the need for 128k or floppy disks.   

Quote from: Carnivac on 16:17, 09 July 12
I don't.  And I also don't forget that Turrican II ran very nicely on my 464 with it's huge levels, decent multi-directional scrolling, varied tiles and large bosses.  So the 464 is certainly capable of a graphically impressive, highly playable shooter without the need for 128k or floppy disks.

Turrican is not sooo great. GFX are nice, but don't have much diversion. There are no real background GFX, it's sprites are small and the code is slow (since it must be compact). Sorry, I know a lot of people like this game, but to me - after all i heard about it - it was just a let down.
However you could argue with BB4CPC.  ;D
BTW: big bosses.... Game over II ;-)

Quote from: TFM/FS on 16:20, 09 July 12
Turrican is not sooo great. GFX are nice, but don't have much diversion. There are no real background GFX, it's sprites are small and the code is slow (since it must be compact).

You've got to be kidding.  Turrican II was a hell of an achievement on the CPC.  It plays great and looks great (though I would have rendered Turrican in blue rather than green but that's beside the point).  Small sprites?   Um, what?   Turrican himself is a decent size, you get to upgrade your gun to a satisfyingly large flamey thing of death, and various enemies like the mid-level boss on level 1 are among the largest graphics on the CPC.  And again I shall state it ran on a standard CPC 464.  And I loved it.  Even with the superior Amiga version in my collection I still find myself playing the CPC version from time to time.  It has it's own sense of 'character' in a way.

Anyways I reckon that'll be my last word on the forum for a week or so.  Gotta focus on the play and put CPC thoughts out of my mind so no distracting websites for me.  Have a good week.   :D

Turrican II on CPC is just a joke.
You Robocop GFx is better than this whole game.

Quote from: TFM/FS on 15:56, 09 July 12
Usage of small tiles does limit RAM needed for GFX, but it does increase RAM needed for the matrix to tiles.
So how much RAM do you need?
- 16 KB for a matrix / map of the levels
- 16 KB for Tiles GFX data
- 16 KB for Sprites / enemy GFX data
- 16 KB for Sound (yes!)
- 16 KB or 32 KB for V-RAM (screens)
- 16 KB (or even more) for the Code managing that all.
Graphics people tend to forget that there must be also some code, and yes it does need space too ;-) And if you want just a bit of AI it will need really some RAM ;-) :-D

16KB is enough for many many levels if 4KB can hold 25 screens of action! And multi-load is an option, albeit an annoying one on tape, but hey, the 464 had a tape counter.
Carnivac barely has 4KB of unique tiles so far, so I expect a level's tiles can fit in 8KB. 16KB for sprites and enemies sounds reasonable however.
16KB for audio? Has any game on the 464 ever had 16KB for the music and effects?

A game would have level unique data, that I think should fit within 16KB (therefore a 6128 can have 5 levels cached). 4KB for level-specific tiles, 2KB for the map (12 screens is enough for Robocop - it's been a long time since I played it), 8KB for level-specific sprites/enemies, 2KB misc (special code routines for the level?).


So a 464 multi-load game could be configured roughly: 16KB code, 16KB shared data (4KB shared tiles, 8KB shared sprites, 4KB shared audio), 16KB level data, 16KB single-buffered screen display (screen split makes it more interesting in reality).

indeed a lot of music and effects for most games is about 6kb.

@Briggsy, sorry mate, you mix things up here. Your calculations are not reproducible.
25 screens in 4 KB? Well, if you work with underscan, no backgrounds and 8 bit variables. Then maybe. But that kind of game would be shitty!
Have you ever made a game?

Quote from: arnoldemu on 17:39, 09 July 12
indeed a lot of music and effects for most games is about 6kb.

Obviously, and everyone can hear that (because it doesn't take long :laugh: ). Now look at better games, using the 64 KB of the 6128 for samples (f.e. dragonninja or whatever). See, 16 KB is rather small - still. :)

Quote from: TFM/FS on 18:44, 09 July 12
@Briggsy, sorry mate, you mix things up here. Your calculations are not reproducible.
25 screens in 4 KB? Well, if you work with underscan, no backgrounds and 8 bit variables. Then maybe. But that kind of game would be shitty!
Have you ever made a game?

The RoboCop screen is 16x10 characters in size (yes, it's underscan). 1 byte/tile (remember, we've not even got 64 tiles yet) makes a screen 160 bytes in size. Ten screens is probably a decent size for this game, so that's 1600 bytes, but 20 would only by 3200 bytes (becomes a problem for single-load 464 games though).


Enemies? You can have special blocks that denote an enemy start and type, for example an enemy at a window its own block, a dude on the road is its own block. The game can interpret it how it likes when that block appears on screen.


Platforms? Solid tiles can be set with a single bit in the tile number, giving 128 background and 128 foreground blocks. You also have level-specific blocks and shared-across-all-level blocks, you'd probably use bit 7 for that, so the solid/non-solid could be a lower bit.

Quote from: TFM/FS on 18:51, 09 July 12Obviously, and everyone can hear that (because it doesn't take long :laugh: ). Now look at better games, using the 64 KB of the 6128 for samples (f.e. dragonninja or whatever). See, 16 KB is rather small - still. :)

Yeah, so the 6128 version of the game can have extras like a very long music track and more graphics. But when we're talking about a 464, you want to have 16KB of music, 16KB of code, 24KB of screen data, leaving 8KB for all graphics. I don't think that's viable for a game running on a 464 that wants to have decent graphics. I think the audio is what can be trimmed down, not the graphics.

Quote from: Briggsy on 19:25, 09 July 12

The RoboCop screen is 16x10 characters in size (yes, it's underscan). 1 byte/tile (remember, we've not even got 64 tiles yet) makes a screen 160 bytes in size. Ten screens is probably a decent size for this game, so that's 1600 bytes, but 20 would only by 3200 bytes (becomes a problem for single-load 464 games though).

Except that is 32x16 char and 1 byte/tile only work if you don't excess 256 different tiles for all the map. (w/o any attribute like flip, ...)
So, a 20 screens map take 10K, w/o storing the 4K tiles...

[quote 4kb hor=TotO link=topic=6865.msg47950#msg47950 date=1341860453]
Except that is 32x16 char and 1 byte/tile only work if you don't excess 256 different tiles for all the map. (w/o any attribute like flip, ...)
So, a 20 screens map take 10K, w/o storing the 4K tiles...
[/quote]
Erm, not with 8x16 tiles its not.
Can probably get the screens down to 40 bytes each, at the cost of reduced variety, and building larger tiles from 16 smaller tiles.

@Toto: Right. :) And if you work with 128 tiles (not much!), then you pretty much need 16 bit variables. 7 bits for the tile-number and 9 bit for any kind of special functions (like, moving tile, deadly tile, walkable tile, and and and). Very soon a lot of RAM is used.
Using 8 bit variables for tiles can provide 2 bits for special functions (this way only four!) and 6 bits for tile-number (only 64 here). And that's not much. Like a Speccy port.

Quote from: Briggsy on 20:12, 09 July 12
Erm, not with 8x16 tiles its not.

Sure, but this great mock-up don't use that.

Quote from: Briggsy on 20:12, 09 July 12
Erm, not with 8x16 tiles its not.

If you use 8x16 tiles then evey tile is soooo big that you need huge-ass RAM for GFX _and_ you will need 1024 tiles ;-)
In my games I use a tile size of 16x16 pixel in MODE 0. One screen has 13(x) * 18(y) tiles. Every tile is represented by a 16 bit variable, which can turn every tile in any kind of special-field.
So one screen has 13 * 18 * bytes, right? That's 468. Now for one level let's say using 20 screens would be 9368 bytes. Now I handle it a bit more tricky and get 3 levels in one 16 KB block (including tables needed for special tiles functions.

Quote from: TotO on 20:19, 09 July 12
Sure, but this great mock-up don't use that.

To me it looks like it does, with a total of around 40-50 unique tiles on the screen. From top-left, scanning lines for unique tiles:
1. Cracked Window Pane Top Left
2. Smooth Window Pane Top Right
3. Brick
4. Broken Top Left Window Pane
5. Broken Top Right Window Pane
6. Brick Shadow
7. Sky Top (Black with blue at bottom) (end of row 1)
8. Smooth Window Pane Bottom Left
9. Cracked Window Pane #2
10. Dodgy Brick
11. Broken Bottom Left Window Pane
12. Broken Bottom Right Window Pane
13. Angled Skyscraper Top
14. Plain Blue Sky
15. Small Angled Skyscraper Top (end of row 2)
16[size=78%]. Skyscraper Windows[/size]
17. Very small angled skyscraper top
18. Small Skyscraper Windows
19. Small Skyscraper Windows #2 (end of row 3)
20. Sign Left
21. VI
22. DE
23. OS
24. HA
25. CK
26. Sign Right
27. Small Skyscraper Windows With Sunset
28. Skyscraper Windows #2
29. Skyscraper Windows #3 (end of row 4)
30. Broken PC Left
31. Broken PC Right
32. Shop Window Middle
33. Shop Window Blank
34. Unbroken PC
35. Broken Window Top Right #2
36 - 39. Fire Animation (end of row five)
40. Broken Window Bottom Left #2
41. Amstrad CPC 464
42. Broken PC
43. Hydrant Top in front of window
44. Broken Window Bottom Right #2
45. Wall Top (end of row six)
46. Shop Window Sill
47. Hydrant Stem in front of window sill
48. Wall Bottom (end of row seven)
49. Road/Pavement #1
50. Road/Pavement #2
51. Road/Pavement Puddle?
52. Road/Pavement with drain?
53. Crate (although this looks more like a sprite rather than background)
54. Whey Protein Container (again, sprite)


This isn't hundreds of blocks! It's 50 on a single screen of 128 blocks (I see now it's merely 16x8, not 16x10 like I wrote previously). The rest of  the level would be reusing a lot of these blocks (bricks, broken windows, road, wall, etc). I guess there would be some drainpipes, some chainlink fencing, a postbox, phone box, more shop signs, shuttered windows, etc. A total under 256 is easy, and more likely 128 is achievable.


128 64-byte 8x16 tiles. A shocking 8KB of graphics tile memory.

Quote from: TFM/FS on 20:26, 09 July 12
If you use 8x16 tiles then evey tile is soooo big that you need huge-ass RAM for GFX _and_ you will need 1024 tiles ;-)
In my games I use a tile size of 16x16 pixel in MODE 0. One screen has 13(x) * 18(y) tiles. Every tile is represented by a 16 bit variable, which can turn every tile in any kind of special-field.
So one screen has 13 * 18 * bytes, right? That's 468. Now for one level let's say using 20 screens would be 9368 bytes. Now I handle it a bit more tricky and get 3 levels in one 16 KB block (including tables needed for special tiles functions.

Each type of game will have it's own best solution for how the level data is organised. One game needs special bits to denote something at a tile, other games simply have special tiles because you don't need the flexibility of enabling every tile to be flippable, mirrorable, dissolvable, etc.


This RoboCop game has special tiles (in my mind). When a new column of tiles is processed as it is scrolling onto the screen, the game engine checks them. Broken Window = Enemy At The Window. "Brick #8" triggers an enemy running along ground. You can also have a per-level table of "When RoboCop is X tiles into level, do Y" where Y could be something like "Add Enemy 4 at 90,3" or "Drop Ammo Pack at 40".


The animated fire would be a major difficulty to achieve in my opinion, especially when it is layered over the background. Maybe it could be done at 1/4 frame rate, updating two tile rows each frame.


As for 1024 tiles - I think you can design a beautiful game with 1/10 the tiles, and 1/4 would make it luxurious! :-)

Quote from: TFM/FS on 20:13, 09 July 12
@Toto: Right. :) And if you work with 128 tiles (not much!), then you pretty much need 16 bit variables. 7 bits for the tile-number and 9 bit for any kind of special functions (like, moving tile, deadly tile, walkable tile, and and and). Very soon a lot of RAM is used.
Using 8 bit variables for tiles can provide 2 bits for special functions (this way only four!) and 6 bits for tile-number (only 64 here). And that's not much. Like a Speccy port.

Well, that's one way of doing it. Another is to have up-to-256 tiles and use a lookup table to hold information about each tile.
You could also compress the tile data and decompress a screen of tiles at a time. etc...

Quote from: ralferoo on 09:07, 10 July 12
Well, that's one way of doing it. Another is to have up-to-256 tiles and use a lookup table to hold information about each tile.
You could also compress the tile data and decompress a screen of tiles at a time. etc...

Sure, it's an attribute table. A clever way, but take space too.
And for storing compressed GFx in memory, you need a buffer to uncompress them and display each time that was needed. So forget, it's not possible. It's a game, not a slideshow. ;)

Quote from: Briggsy on 23:50, 09 July 12
To me it looks like it does, with a total of around 40-50 unique tiles on the screen. [...]
This isn't hundreds of blocks! It's 50 on a single screen of 128 blocks (I see now it's merely 16x8, not 16x10 like I wrote previously). The rest of  the level would be reusing a lot of these blocks (bricks, broken windows, road, wall, etc). I guess there would be some drainpipes, some chainlink fencing, a postbox, phone box, more shop signs, shuttered windows, etc. A total under 256 is easy, and more likely 128 is achievable.

128 64-byte 8x16 tiles. A shocking 8KB of graphics tile memory.

Sure, you can cut the background with 4x4, 4x8 or 8x8 chars patterns, or everything you want to recompose the background picture. But, you have to keep all from the same size for doing a map. Else, you can't manage the scrolling properly. (not like in your list)


Now, better to restore this place for the Carnivac's mockups.
I want to see another stage, or a boss battle now...

Serve the public trust, Protect the innocent, Uphold the law!!!  ;D

Quote from: TFM/FS on 20:13, 09 July 12
@Toto: Right. :) And if you work with 128 tiles (not much!), then you pretty much need 16 bit variables. 7 bits for the tile-number and 9 bit for any kind of special functions (like, moving tile, deadly tile, walkable tile, and and and). Very soon a lot of RAM is used.

No you don't.

re-organise your tiles. Then use tile id to define it's function.
so all tiles between 0 and 7 are walkable, etc.
This is another way to do it.

I know you will never believe 64k can do a good game.

True, 128k gives more content, larger game and is much easier to use without sweating over each byte.
But 64k is still enough.

true, 64k is not suited to games with overscan, and sure overscan is nice in a game, but it's not a must have.
let's move the talk to be constructive and not 64k vs 128k.

I think Carnivac will come back in a week (good luck with the play!!) and be in shock :D

Quote from: arnoldemu on 09:48, 10 July 12
true, 64k is not suited to games with overscan, and sure overscan is nice in a game, but it's not a must have.
let's move the talk to be constructive and not 64k vs 128k.

The CPC (64K or 128K) is not suitable for overscan arcade games, at all.

A good game is not a game with nice GFx and music. But, a game with a nice gameplay first where you take fun to play.
One of my favotite CPC game is a BASIC Tron clone... :D 

Both computers are the same, just that with 128K you get 4 pages more to see the game with a more ambitious look.
More GFx, more musics, faster and smooth display, less loadings ... All can be better, but not more easy... It's much work too. :)

It's not the problem on CPC+, because 64K is enough for all games if you do it on a cartridge.
But on a CPC, with Tape, all need to be stored in memory.
You don't make worst or better games, but different games.

EDIT:
Here a solution to solve the "problem".
This close picture use 48 uniques tiles (2x2 chars*) and some ompimized things for fonts.
With that, you can manage a full level with a 128 tiles map and mirror flip on a 64K CPC. ;)


* fix: I wrote 16x16, like for MODE1. Stupid me.

Quote from: ralferoo on 09:07, 10 July 12
Well, that's one way of doing it. Another is to have up-to-256 tiles and use a lookup table to hold information about each tile.
You could also compress the tile data and decompress a screen of tiles at a time. etc...

Well in my engine I use 16 bit variables, and in addition a couple (!) of look up tables. Tables f.e. for doors, field where a person interacts, field where something is located, and and and....
Also moving tiles (flames f.e.) are not so easy. A flame .. let's say is has 5 phases. You can show it 1-2-3-4-5, 1-2-3-4-5, 1-2-3-4-5,  or you can show it like 1-2-3-4-5, 5-4-3-2-1, 1-2-3-4-5, 5-4-3-2-1, 1-2-3-4-5, 5-4-3-2-1, .
There is so much that can be considered, well you won't need that for Robocop. But if I write an engine, then not only for one game ;-) Sure, the disadvantage may be RAM usage, but there is a speed gain too.

@Arnoldemu: Reorganize tiles??? My tile-sets do usually have 128 different tiles (and 64 is for the CPCs sake not enough, else it looks boring!). So I will not get everything else in one bit. However I like to do games as good as possible. That excludes thereby the dogma of memory saving just for 464 compatibility and the price of sacrificing well GFX, samples, bigger sprites and andvanced gameplay. However TotO is right here, the gameplay can be the same and does less depend on RAM usage.

Quote from: TotO on 09:56, 10 July 12Here a solution to solve the "problem". This close picture use 48 uniques tiles (16x16) and some ompimized things for fonts.With that, you can manage a full level with a 128 tiles map and mirror flip on a 64K CPC. ;)

16x16 - why? 8x16 is far more flexible, and in MODE 0 the resulting tile is square.
Otherwise this is exactly what I've been writing, even going as far as to enumerate every unique tile on Carnivac's mockup when people were saying that there weren't many duplicate tiles, needing 1024 tiles, etc.

Quote from: Briggsy on 17:04, 10 July 1216x16 - why? 8x16 is far more flexible, and in MODE 0 the resulting tile is square.

When he wrote 16*16 he means same thing like you , a 4*16 bytes tile.Using 2*8 bytes tiles is a good deal too if you uses bigger patterns than 2*2 chars (like 4*2 or 4*4 for example).There are 2 advantages of using patterns, first you reduce dramaticaly map size (/16 for a 4*4 pattern) and this allow you increase variety.Its counterpart is you need to store patterns but if your pattern size is adapted to map style, you still save memory.
Another advantage of using pattern is you can store tiles behavior (solid,instantkill,water,ladder and so on) in the pattern instead of attaching it to a particular tile.That make player interaction with map more flexible.

Quote from: Briggsy on 17:04, 10 July 12
16x16 - why? 8x16 is far more flexible, and in MODE 0 the resulting tile is square.
Otherwise this is exactly what I've been writing, even going as far as to enumerate every unique tile on Carnivac's mockup when people were saying that there weren't many duplicate tiles, needing 1024 tiles, etc.

Sorry, I would like to said 2x2 chars, so 8x16 pixels in mode 0.
The Carnivac's mockup need more tiles, because too much chars change for few pixels (like walls).

EDIT:
Thank you fano. :p

Quote from: fano on 17:30, 10 July 12
When he wrote 16*16 he means same thing like you , a 4*16 bytes tile.Using 2*8 bytes tiles is a good deal too if you uses bigger patterns than 2*2 chars (like 4*2 or 4*4 for example).There are 2 advantages of using patterns, first you reduce dramaticaly map size (/16 for a 4*4 pattern) and this allow you increase variety.Its counterpart is you need to store patterns but if your pattern size is adapted to map style, you still save memory.
Another advantage of using pattern is you can store tiles behavior (solid,instantkill,water,ladder and so on) in the pattern instead of attaching it to a particular tile.That make player interaction with map more flexible.

Ah thanks, I thought so but just needed to clarify.


I've been working on some graphics that use 4x8 pixel tiles composed 4x4 into larger tiles as you write, the 4x8 tileset is in the top right, and tiles in two sizes elsewhere.


(https://sites.google.com/a/graham-briggs.co.uk/webdump/_/rsrc/1341942782833/retro-projects/other-cpc-ideas/CPCDungeon2.png)

Ok, IMHO smaller tiles lead ultimately to ugly GFX. Having said this, that's not true for all GFX creators, but for a lot of them. Furthermore smaller tiles need more RAM in the map again. For a cannon fodder like game smaller tiles will be fine, but for GFX-ORGY games it's IMHO better to use bigger tiles. Reason? Compare commercial games... Ok, for GFX experts like Tolkin, MacDeath or Carnivac (just to mention three) this is all not a problem. For the average creator it is though.

Quote from: TFM/FS on 20:30, 10 July 12
Ok, IMHO smaller tiles lead ultimately to ugly GFX. Having said this, that's not true for all GFX creators, but for a lot of them. Furthermore smaller tiles need more RAM in the map again.

Smaller tiles is the final result, the gfx creator work on 4*4 char tiles (sized enough to make good graphics) , the tool build patterns from theses and cut down them to 1 char tiles, removing redundancy.The final result is often smaller.If you take a look, major part of the commercial games (whatever the machine) use patterns.

Hi fano, you brought me straight into the 20 century, even a bit into the 21 century. Well, I've been talking more about the old days of the CPC. But yes, you can break down tiles after creating them. However, I think one single character may be already too small, because you need will have a huge number of them.
We probably all agree, that it always depends on the single game to find an optimum. (I found that for me in 16x16 pixel tiles).

Quote from: TFM/FS on 21:06, 10 July 12We probably all agree, that it always depends on the single game to find an optimum. (I found that for me in 16x16 pixel tiles).

That's right , i don't think this method would save memory on a game like Cybernoid/II that uses 4*16 bytes tiles  ;)
Btw , that's not i am doing a fixation on char but simply it is the most close to hardware unit at the end (CRTC like a lot of graphics chip is character based)

Well, I don't see a need to connect the hardware features to tile size. For example my 16x16 tiles get moved into the visible screen (right or left) in four steps. So I have four extra routines for that (not that extra though, since using self modifying code). Smaller tiles would only need one such routine, but the gain of memory is probably not that much... However, pleasure to talk about it  :)

I like the button that makes it possible to comment "ivarf likes this". But where is the "ivarf doesn't have a clue about this" button? :o


;D

Quote from: TFM/FS on 22:49, 10 July 12
Well, I don't see a need to connect the hardware features to tile size. For example my 16x16 tiles get moved into the visible screen (right or left) in four steps. So I have four extra routines for that (not that extra though, since using self modifying code). Smaller tiles would only need one such routine, but the gain of memory is probably not that much... However, pleasure to talk about it  :)

Yes , it is pleasure to discuss about technics and programming philosophy  (sorry to pollute a bit the thread).The main point about trying to connect to the hardware is optimisation.Designing program around character as unit allows a lot of optimisation , for drawing , addresses calculation or control for addresses cycling when using hardware scrolling.

QuoteOk, IMHO smaller tiles lead ultimately to ugly GFX. Having said this, that's not true for all GFX creators, but for a lot of them.

this is not really how it works, the quality comes from the actual surface of original content...

QuoteFurthermore smaller tiles need more RAM in the map again.

but this is true...
while the pure Data is according to the total surface of all tiles/sprites, getting the "tiles" smaller means far more addressing... and we all know address code is often bigger than Data itself.

QuoteFor a cannon fodder like game smaller tiles will be fine, but for GFX-ORGY games it's IMHO better to use bigger tiles.

Rick dangerous actually used 4x8 tiles in a bigg line of 4x4096 ... ouch, painest pain for my eyes in my life ever.

QuoteReason? Compare commercial games...

well done smaller tiles can be quite interesting for a few specific textures...
but if you want to include a few bigger elements, this can be some waste of address I guess.
the problem with big tiles is that you get a "Nintendo NES effect", with very repetitive textures.

with smaller tiles you can mix it up far more and get some more realistic effects, but at cost off addressing time and the tiles coordinates map (perhaps even collisions) is bigger in RAM I guess, perhaps even longer to put all those tiles in "VRAM" ?
May not be good with scrollings too.

smaller tiles = bigger MAP "resolution".

QuoteOk, for GFX experts like Tolkin, MacDeath or Carnivac (just to mention three) this is all not a problem. For the average creator it is though.

oh please, I am not that much an expert, Carnivac is far better than me...
I just happen to used to be better than average in drawing/art while at school, which still help me a little big nowadays when "trituring" a few pixels.
but thx anyway to compare me with the 2 others. :)

BTW, getting the 128K as mundane format is always better I guess.

QuoteThe CPC (64K or 128K) is not suitable for overscan arcade games, at all.

is this true if no scrollings are needed ?
well having "VRAM" into 32K must reduce even more the actual CPU time I guess.

Quote from: MacDeath on 09:01, 11 July 12is this true if no scrollings are needed ?

It's why I said, for Arcade games. ;)

Quote from: MacDeath on 09:01, 11 July 12Rick dangerous actually used 4x8 tiles in a bigg line of 4x4096 ... ouch, painest pain for my eyes in my life ever.

Sorry for you m8 but you still made a nice on work on so small tiles  :P , that was just because it was a hack and this 4*4096 was the extraction format.RD (and RD2) uses 2*8 bytes tiles but all is arranged in 4*4 chars patterns that i think that was the original format the GFX artists worked on.

Quote from: fano on 10:03, 11 July 12
Sorry for you m8 but you still made a nice on work on so small tiles  :P , that was just because it was a hack and this 4*4096 was the extraction format.RD (and RD2) uses 2*8 bytes tiles but all is arranged in 4*4 chars patterns that i think that was the original format the GFX artists worked on.

4096 different 'char-sized' tiles is interesting - surely that used a significant amount of memory, at 16 bytes per tile? 64KB? Maybe each tile was only 4-colours, and the tileset was divided into different paletted regions (0-127=muds,128-255=stones,256-383=backgrounds,etc).
Each 4x4 'supertile' would have therefore used 32 bytes to define it. Assuming 256 supertiles, that's 8KB of supertile definitions. Quite a lot! Each tile in a supertile could have had flags to denote solid/clear, climbable, etc. Maybe there was some additional compression employed, I can think of ways to halve the memory requirement.
But each screen in the game is definable in 48 bytes, and it looked great. Possibly even you have fewer supertiles per level you could compress it even further. I guess each screen also needs some bytes for adjacent screen connections.


RD128+ looks lovely, btw!

4096 was the high in pixels in fact.RD uses 512 tiles but for each room is limited to 256 tiles , the high bit acts as a tileset selector and is given in the room definition, that allows to keep 8bits patterns (that you call supertiles).I can not remember how collisions with tiles are managed.
Yes , 32bytes patterns is a bit big but when you paid this "entry ticket", you can make a lot of rooms for a few bytes.
Actually , we choose 4*2 patterns in 16 bits because that fit well with our maps.The main advantage of using 16 bits is you can store directly address in pattern cell and the 4 lower bits are free for flags because tiles are 16 bytes and are 16 bytes aligned.
btw another advantage of using small tiles is for slopes calculation on a non flat landscape, this is a thing difficult to do with bigger tiles.

Quote from: TFM/FS on 22:49, 10 July 12
Well, I don't see a need to connect the hardware features to tile size. For example my 16x16 tiles get moved into the visible screen (right or left) in four steps. So I have four extra routines for that (not that extra though, since using self modifying code). Smaller tiles would only need one such routine, but the gain of memory is probably not that much... However, pleasure to talk about it  :)

4 steps??? Why?

I have hardware scrolling code that uses large tiles. I have 1 function to draw the tiles. I store an offset into the tile, and the offset for the next line. I draw a small column of the tile.

So why so many functions?

Quote from: fano on 13:00, 11 July 12
4096 was the high in pixels in fact.RD uses 512 tiles but for each room is limited to 256 tiles , the high bit acts as a tileset selector and is given in the room definition, that allows to keep 8bits patterns (that you call supertiles).I can not remember how collisions with tiles are managed.
Yes , 32bytes patterns is a bit big but when you paid this "entry ticket", you can make a lot of rooms for a few bytes.
Actually , we choose 4*2 patterns in 16 bits because that fit well with our maps.The main advantage of using 16 bits is you can store directly address in pattern cell and the 4 lower bits are free for flags because tiles are 16 bytes and are 16 bytes aligned.
btw another advantage of using small tiles is for slopes calculation on a non flat landscape, this is a thing difficult to do with bigger tiles.

Very clever! just goes to show how many different ways of doing something there is, and how picking the best solution will be very dependent on the game itself.

Quote from: arnoldemu on 13:07, 11 July 12
4 steps??? Why?

I have hardware scrolling code that uses large tiles. I have 1 function to draw the tiles. I store an offset into the tile, and the offset for the next line. I draw a small column of the tile.

So why so many functions?

Speed ;-)

Quote

Quoteis this true if no scrollings are needed ?

It's why I said, for Arcade games.

Arkanoid was an Arcade game, like you know, those coin operated machine displayed in "Arcades"

Also poor Carnivac, you spill a lot of technical stuff here... not sure he will appreciate.

OK. An Arcade game with a scrolling, like 90% of the arcade games. ;)
(In mind Renegade, Gryzor, Rygar, Double Dragon, Track & Field, ...)

Quote from: MacDeath on 23:40, 11 July 12Also poor Carnivac, you spill a lot of technical stuff here... not sure he will appreciate.

Why he will not appreciate to know why, like this, it's picture can't be used on a real 464 game ?
For a time, some peoples take a moment to explain their points of view, give examples, and share technical stuff to do it.
On the contrary, I'm sure that was been befefical for everybody here. :)

Jeez there's a lot of techy stuff in here I have to sort through when I have time.   But first...

Quote from: TotO on 16:53, 09 July 12
Turrican II on CPC is just a joke.
You Robocop GFx is better than this whole game.

Sorry you feel that way.  Turrican II on CPC is the biggest reason I enjoy CPC gaming and CPC graphics.  It's by far the best looking 8 bit version of the excellent game (I find the C64 version incredibly ugly with the most puke-like palette I've ever seen) and it's my number one favorite action game on CPC bar none.  Heck, I even wore out the Amstrad Action covertape of the level 1 demo of it when I was a kid.  It's been a massive influence on my entire time as a graphics artist.   It's fine if you don't like it but to call it a joke when I find it to the be among the benchmarks for what I feel the 464 is really capable of is something I find actually quite offensive.  My Cosmic Prison Commando project is pretty much a 'love-letter' of sorts to the CPC version of Turrican II and how it inspired me and kept me entertained all those years ago.

Quote from: beaker on 19:48, 05 July 12

This is what's left of my collection. Still kicking myself for selling the like of Jetfire years ago...

[attach=2]

In Oxfam in Ely on Friday I spotted something good and oddly timely given my comment about your collection there.  Yup, I found a DINOBOT for £1.99 in extremely good condition.  Good ol' Sludge the Brontosaurus.  Joints all tight (hands so tight I had to prise them out with a knife when transforming to robot).  Chrome all intact.   Stickers a little worn (and I think the feet ones are in wrong place) but they're easily replaced thanks to Reprolabels.  I let Oxfam keep the change from the £5 note I gave them for it cos it's worth more.  Yeah I don't really collect G1 figures anymore but I couldn't pass that up.  Gonna get his weapons from eBay to complete him and then if I want to sell him at a later date he'll be worth a lot more than I paid (heck he's probably worth more than I paid even without weapons but a 100% complete figure always attracts the rich collectors more).

Quote from: Carnivac on 14:45, 15 July 12Turrican II on CPC is the biggest reason I enjoy CPC gaming and CPC graphics.  It's by far the best looking 8 bit version of the excellent game (I find the C64 version incredibly ugly with the most puke-like palette I've ever seen) and it's my number one favorite action game on CPC bar none.

Turrican II is first a great Amiga game. The ST version is a great port, the best ST port of all time for me.
Because gameplay, sound and graphics are really close to the original. An amazing job.

The palette don't make a game.
The C64 version is close too, but you can see that you are on a 8-bit computer.

But... The CPC version is not a nice port (instead of Prince of Persia or Andre Panza Kick Boxing as exemple).
It's not better than the first Turrican port on CPC... Loosing too much of the original...
Where are the graphics style ? musics ? the gameplay ?

OK, I understand that you like this game, probably because you don't know the Amiga version first, else you may understand that you don't really play the same game.

I have to be objective and not get in mind that I love a computer to make me an opinion.
That was just a ridiculous situation. and sure, I will prefer that you comment the others posts. :)

Quote from: TotO on 16:05, 15 July 12
Turrican II is first a great Amiga game. The ST version is a great port, the best ST port of all time for me.
Because gameplay, sound and graphics are really close to the original. An amazing job.

Sound?  Please.  The Atari ST version has awful sounding music for what's supposed to be a 16 bit computer.  It doesn't stand a chance against it's main rival version on the Amiga.

Quote
Where are the graphics style ? musics ? the gameplay ?

Music's not there except on the title screen, fine but the graphic style is great and the gameplay is excellent and still entertains me to this day.

Quote
OK, I understand that you like this game, probably because you don't know the Amiga version first, else you may understand that you don't really play the same game.

Oh don't bloody well presume I'd suddenly hate the CPC version cos I supposedly haven't played the Amiga version.  I've already mentioned that I love the Amiga version (in fact I played the Amiga version FIRST and OWNED it for the last 20 years) and that the CPC version has it's own beautiful charm and appeal for me and is a hell of of a great conversion despite the differences between an Amiga and a CPC 464 and if you can't see that then I really can't relate to you at all. 

Quote
But... The CPC version is not a nice port (instead of Prince of Persia or Andre Panza Kick Boxing as exemple).

To hell with Prince of Persia.  It was a tedious, sluggish, unresponsive, boring game on all formats.  The animation is smooth, yes but the gameplay was frustratingly awful because of it and was graphically very basic otherwise.    And I couldn't care less about a Kick Boxing game.   

Jeez...

Quote from: Carnivac on 16:21, 15 July 12
Sound?  Please.  The Atari ST version has awful sounding music for what's supposed to be a 16 bit computer.  It doesn't stand a chance against it's main rival version on the Amiga.

Please, listen again this Jochen Hippel conversion on youtube for exemple.
Never an Atari ST game has sounded like that. It's an impressive technical work.
If you though that if awful, so understand that the CPC version is just a joke... :)

Quote from: TotO on 16:50, 15 July 12
Please, listen again this Stéphane Picq conversion on youtube for exemple.
Never an Atari ST game has sounded like that. It's an impressive technical work.
If you though that if awful, so understand that the CPC version is just a joke... :)

Oh I'm sure it would sound great if that was running on an 8 bit but compared to the Amiga version which was the ST's main rival at the time it doesn't even come remotely close while yes the graphics do look comparable to the Amiga game if not quite as good in some areas...  The Amiga version has probably my most favorite soundtrack of all time.

The technical stuff from the positive folks here made me feel quite motivated to get back into wanting to actually make a CPC game but people like you and a few others on here and your pretentious atitudes who seem almost dead set against even considering coming up with ideas about getting the most out of a 464 and appreciating the fine work done on it at the time are really killing any interest I had.   We're not all obsessed with 128k machines or the failed Plus range or anything like that... Some of us just wanna get the most out of the good ol' 464. 

Think I'll take another break from here then.  Was looking forward to coming back here after the play (which I'm really depressed about now it's all over and the last 6 months of joyous times rehearsing with that cast has come to an end and I have no damn idea what to do now) but nah, this whole thing's wound me up too much and I need some space to calm down and think if this is all worth the effort.

Quote from: Carnivac on 16:59, 15 July 12
The technical stuff from the positive folks here made me feel quite motivated to get back into wanting to actually make a CPC game

Do it!  8)

Quotebut people like you and a few others on here and your pretentious atitudes who seem almost dead set against even considering coming up with ideas about getting the most out of a 464 and appreciating the fine work done on it at the time are really killing any interest I had.   We're not all obsessed with 128k machines or the failed Plus range or anything like that... Some of us just wanna get the most out of the good ol' 464. 

Just do it! It'll be all the more satisfying when you make something awesome for the 464! :)

Seriously, just do whatever you want to do, make whatever you want to make. The whole point of retro for me is making something awesome with a technical restriction - who cares if 128KB would make something better, if you want to code for a 464 rather than a 6128, an Amiga, an XT, whatever, just do it!

It's a hobby, it's supposed to be fun! And you don't have to do whatever anyone else wants... :D

 Guys, guys, why not take it down a notch? Is it really worth fighting over details on a topic we all love? Before pressing "Post" please do re-read what you wrote. There's definitely no reason to be so absolute about stuff someone else might like, be it Turrican or PoP[nb]I love Prince of Persia btw, gameplay is superb, totally not sluggish, totally responsive, and far from the least boring, while I never understood Turrican. But this dosn't mean I'll lash out against it or other titles like that...[/nb]. It's not politics! :D


Do calm down guys... please?

QuoteWe're not all obsessed with 128k machines or the failed Plus range or anything like that... Some of us just wanna get the most out of the good ol' 464. 

well, just geting a good old CPC game is good too.

It's just that getting also even better games thx to those "better specs" machines is good too.


If you want to get your graphix into a real CPC production, you will find that the coder involved will fastly tone you down, invoking RAM problems or whatever... so all the Graphics you imaginated actually can't be used as they are.

PLUS is of course basically a way to have more freedom (see my composition for ReSet#8 on PLUS, many greys and browns/Reds...)

But even for good old "CPC" palette (which is still/yet a great palette/graphical stuff... we all grew up with this here and liked it !), still having/using 128K is simply a  practical way to have just more graphic content at the same time.

means more tiles, more sprites frames, and so on... not just "double buffering" and techniques to get even more playable games.


Seriously we wouldn't even complain with the 64K only configsd had Alan Sugar enabled the "464" to be just "480". Really.
just +16K of RAM would be quite enough to get those "speccy48" ports actually well enough ported.




Concerning Turrican2...
Actually I didn't played it at the time.
when I looked at the picture, to me the graphics weren't that well "ported" (re-created) yet not bad... just could be better.
The main player sprite is not as good as in the first opus : looks blockier in the 2nd opus, only a few pixels here and there and a few better ink selection could have done far betterly IMO. yeay, easier to tell this 20 years after.

Success from a 1st opus can get you lazy for the second opus because you simply cash out from the franchise... not Programmer's nor Graphician's fault : just  corporate's fault (they could want get them enough time to do it betterly).

But playability is not that bad at all, and graphics are not that bad too after all. This remains a (very) good games after all.
Just slightly not as well adapted than the first opus (but it had a few more gameplay features too perhaps).

Its a bit similar to Stromlord 2 (deliverance) where the sprites are less well ported (graphically) from C64 than in the 1st opus...
Games remains good, but graphically, is inferior.

Rick dangerous on the other hand, the 1st opus is inferiorly ported : sprites looks too much C64ish, no music, no menu...
while Rick Dangerous2 is "almost perfect"...
yet some palette screw up occured (a dark blue turned into a Green instead... in order to match the "Vegetalia" level palette...).

Such things often happened during those dark age era of home computer video games.

I'm fine with CPC464... but i know CPC6128 or even 6128PLUS can offer a bit more, and CPC464 can easily be upgraded into "6128" specifications nowadays.

To me 464 and 6128 are both CPCs, not really different machines, it's just the 464 is not at best hardware setting available...
Disc is better than Tapes, 128K is better than 64K yet CPC is good to begin with.
Especially as a graphical machine from 1984.

If you feel Robocop could have used better graphic than what we had, it's not that the graphic artist didn't do their job, it's because they were actually limited to the 64K limitation so such graphics as yours (awesome) couldn't be implemented in a real game.

It's like if your modern PC could use +2 gigabytes RAM but hey... don't want to get the extra RAM module for your computer.
Then don't complain becaue you can't you use the last Battlefield franchise game version. (or whatever modern game)

I never liked Turrican 2 on the CPC either, but still I would have very much loved to see your graphics in a CPC game. It is some of the best I have seen on my favorite computer. My 464 was my first and will always be closest to my heart.

Quote from: Carnivac on 14:50, 15 July 12
In Oxfam in Ely on Friday I spotted something good and oddly timely given my comment about your collection there.  Yup, I found a DINOBOT for £1.99 in extremely good condition.  Good ol' Sludge the Brontosaurus.  Joints all tight (hands so tight I had to prise them out with a knife when transforming to robot).  Chrome all intact.   Stickers a little worn (and I think the feet ones are in wrong place) but they're easily replaced thanks to Reprolabels.  I let Oxfam keep the change from the £5 note I gave them for it cos it's worth more.  Yeah I don't really collect G1 figures anymore but I couldn't pass that up.  Gonna get his weapons from eBay to complete him and then if I want to sell him at a later date he'll be worth a lot more than I paid (heck he's probably worth more than I paid even without weapons but a 100% complete figure always attracts the rich collectors more).

Great find!!!  :D  My friend in the UK keeps telling me how he picks up all these bargains in charity shops but I never seem to have any luck lol.

I take it your play went well?

I hope you stick in there with the CPC as your screens look awsome. I am going to be a complete hypocrite here; I agree that neglecting the CPC 464 in favour of 128k is a shame, and it would be wrong to force people down that route (my first Amstrad machine was a CPC 464 with colour monitor which was my main computer until 1993/4) but back in the day I saved my pocket money and bought the DK Tronics 64k RAM pack as software houses started releasing some 128k only games on tape (I think Addams Family and Final Fight on release but I am probably wrong again  :laugh: ).

In regards to the Easter Egg R-Type remake, rather than make a game that would run on any CPC, the whole point seemed to be to push the CPC to the limits to show what it could have looked like and restricting it to 64k would have meant compromises. They haven't released a 3 inch disk version so even with 2 128k machines (6128 and 6128 plus) I need additional hardware in the form of the HxC floppy emulator to play it at the moment so it's not like they only have it in for 64k users...  :laugh:  but what they produced is awsome  :)

Well, I did take a look at Turrican II again - and I found out why I never liked it! It's -just- the single color grey-like background. On Amiga there are mixed colors, like in Stryker or Switchblade (on Plus IIRC).
If the background would be not single colored OR just black, it would totally change the ambiente ehm. atmosphere.
However it's amazing that it runs on a CPC464 with 48 KB RAM (disregarding 16 KB V-RAM).

Maybe there's a small project there - making a quick Plus version of Turrican II with a subtle background gradient, and some palette tweaks. Otherwise I think the CPC version looks great - especially compared to the C64 and especially the Spectrum versions.


Anyway Carnivac, I've been enjoying the What If screenshots, and I personally believe that it is achievable. I'm not with the nay-sayers here who can be very depressing and persistent. I hope that you continue with the graphics work as I find it inspiring too.


I know that back in the day when I had the 6128 I wanted more 128KB games, but these days I think it is all about getting the most from the standard hardware configurations, including the 464. An enhanced 6128 version is nice to have on top, and an enhanced Plus version beyond that, but I think it's pretty cool to write something that runs on a 28 year old computer out of the box.

Quote from: Briggsy on 11:28, 16 July 12I know that back in the day when I had the 6128 I wanted more 128KB games, but these days I think it is all about getting the most from the standard hardware configurations, including the 464. An enhanced 6128 version is nice to have on top, and an enhanced Plus version beyond that, but I think it's pretty cool to write something that runs on a 28 year old computer out of the box.

Enhanced versions for 6128 ? And why not degraded versions for 464 instead ?  :-\
Making a game is not like cooking a cake... You can't add a cherry on it at the end.

Quote from: TotO on 12:58, 16 July 12
Enhanced versions for 6128 ? And why not degraded versions for 464 instead ?  :-\
Making a game is not like cooking a cake... You can't add a cherry on it at the end.

Actually, it's generally much easier to move from limited resources to more resources than the other way round, as that way you have the challenges earlier rather than later.

Uhm, so, first place a cherry and then try to bake the cake under it?
:P


rb

Quote from: TotO on 12:58, 16 July 12
Enhanced versions for 6128 ? And why not degraded versions for 464 instead ?  :-\
Making a game is not like cooking a cake... You can't add a cherry on it at the end.

Because I, or whoever, wants to work to the limits set by the original CPC? Which means trying your best in 64KB and then improving things when there is more memory available (more music, more levels, better title screen, more varied graphics).


It's a choice that anyone doing retro projects makes, and the decision should be respected.

Quote from: TotO on 12:58, 16 July 12
Enhanced versions for 6128 ? And why not degraded versions for 464 instead ?  :-\
Making a game is not like cooking a cake... You can't add a cherry on it at the end.

this 64k vs 128k discussion will never end it seems.
better to just get on and make games/demos than moaning?

Quote from: arnoldemu on 13:36, 16 July 12
this 64k vs 128k discussion will never end it seems.
better to just get on and make games/demos than moaning?

Precisely my thinking; while it's an interesting topic in and of itself, it doesn't have much meaning in the real world.


To explain myself: personally I think that even programming for the 128K machines already means working under lots of constraints. It's not as if the 6128 is a super computer that has no relation whatsoever with the 464. And yes, I'd prefer to see 128k releases myself.


On the other hand, who's to say what a programmer should enjoy? If someone wants to do it in 64k, then who are we to *argue* it *should* be done in 128k? Sure, it may be my opinion, but the programmer is not my employee, so it's not like I've got a say in what he's doing.


Just my 2drs.

...and above everything else, development on/for the CPC is about having fun. Surely there's some kind of competition involved in this but I don't see anyone doing this expecting some kind of reward other than recognition of his effort by others with the same strange hobby, and some love spredding :-* .


So, please do whatever you like and lets discuss after we see the results  :D


I see your 2drs and raise you 5  :P


rb

IMHO people should talk loud about something they already have prooven to be able to do. Others maybe should not talk so loud. As we say in Germany 'Schuster bleib bei deinen Leisten'.

I personally think Turrican II is bloody awful graphics and playability, on the other hand Turrican 1 Was fantastically playable and graphically great and leagues ahead of its follow up. It was 64k as well ?

I take back what i said about Turrican II , on further looking at the game , I reckon the play ability is pretty good and there are some beautiful graphical techniques in it. It was quite an ambitious game . With pro's and cons with both versions .  :D

Just to bring this thread back on-topic after so long I thought people might like to know I'm still working on Cosmic Prison Commando.  I've heavily revamped both graphics and the code now to make it more 'realistic' for conversion to CPC someday.

Graphics are redone cos the originals were rushed for the contest back in 2008 and I'm much more experienced with the palette and resolution now.  Tiles have been redone to look better yet more efficient.  The messy over-dithered parallax mountain landscape has been replaced by simpler but more effective static tiles.   There's a lot more recycling in sprites now.  The legs of the player character Jack are re-used for the zombie troopers and the main villain (before his planned transformation into the megaboss of the game) and it's possible to play as those in alternate modes.   As they all begin as prisoners on the prison ship before the game starts it makes sense they all have the same prisoner trousers/boots anyways.  The walking droids now share their leg sprites too (and the flying versions are simply just the top half sprite with no leg sprite).   Jack also has a little 16 pixel high robot buddy (who is 'reprogrammed' from a type of enemy) that goes into tunnels and areas Jack is too big for.  To cut down more on sprites Jack's idle animation is gone as is his 'hair' movement when he runs (the top half is static and adjusts it's y position in time with the run for the 'bobbing' motion).   Despite the cuts, I've improved both the shaping and the shading of the sprites.  Basically the idea is trying to make more out of less.

Also the code has been 'downgraded' in some ways to feel more 8-bit in scrolling and movement using Turrican II for reference.  Screen size is slightly smaller to help with scrolling and speed (again using Turrican II's screen size).   I've been getting a lot of assistance from Daniel Remar (http://www.remar.se/daniel/) who is well known in the indie game scene for creating the games Hero Core and Iji.  Seems my project inspired him to make a similar platform shooter based on a different era of vintage gaming (in his case, the MS-DOS days of PC games) and since we're making similar games there's a lot of idea and code sharing.
There's less enemy sprites on screen at once (again I rushed the old one so I did tend to drop a load of enemies into one area in quite a few places) and there's slightly more emphasis on exploration and completing a level 100%.

Here be a recent screenshot. 

(http://media.tumblr.com/3022f38d398b5d5fffc7e926e8bd9d7b/tumblr_inline_mmp0r4WKjS1qz4rgp.png) (http://media.tumblr.com/3022f38d398b5d5fffc7e926e8bd9d7b/tumblr_inline_mmp0r4WKjS1qz4rgp.png)


I'd still like to find someone who can produce authentic sound effects and all new music.  The current engine still uses the quickly made sound effects I created in SFXR back then and I would like some produced with a CPC and the current music is still the SwitchBlade title screen theme and the Glider Rider bike theme.  Again I would like all new music in CPC formats that are perhaps similar in style and mood to those tunes (cos they fit so well) but clearly new. 

Absolutely beautiful.
I have to say - I really love your work.

Just wondering, what sort of movement would you be aiming for in a cpc version of this?
Would character-based movement be acceptable, where all sprites (and the scrolling itself) move pretty much like the turrican games, and AMC?

Thanks.

I'm not quite sure what 'character-based movement is' but when I described I had made the scrolling and movement more 8-bit style I mean a lot of it (including scrolling and movement of the player and enemies) now goes in 8 pixel movements vertically and 4 pixels horizontally (obviously since it's 'wide-pixel' it looks the same distance as the vertical).    The game runs at a deliberately low frame rate to make it easier to code it in that slightly jerky way.   The jumping is very much like Turrican now where it feels almost like temporary levitation rather than the more 16-bit jumping it had in the old demo and again jumps up and falls down in 8 pixel movements.  The only things I can think of not strictly on a 4x8 grid movement are projectiles fired from certain character's guns such as the player character and the green droid in that screenshot.  The horizontal motion is aligned to the grid but their vertical position is not as they have to look like they're coming out of the guns and having to align the guns to the grid would have put a lot of limitations on the sprite designs.   Round projectiles fired from things that don't have an obvious gun (such as the flying sphere-shaped droids) do align on the grid. 

I'm terrible at explaining things.  ???

Yep, that all makes sense.
A 4x8 grid is pretty much what I meant.

It's used really well in Turrican 2, as it allows the game to run really fast, and consequently it looks quite smooth, even though technically it isn't.
It'd be ideal for cosmic prison commando.

Ah cool.  Yeah, I think I actually somewhat prefer it scrolling this way than when it was silky-smooth in the old demo.  I don't know why.  Maybe I'm just that retro...

Just examining CPC Turrican II again cos I'm working out different ways of doing a smart bomb sort of attack so trying to see what may or may not be possible on a CPC.

Turrican II has quite a few sprites going on during it's crazy ultimate smart bomb thingy.  The CPC version actually has a lot more going on during it than the Amiga version's same attack.  Feels like it has more 'impact' to it.

(http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/tuggg.gif) (http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/tuggg.gif)

The same attack in the Amiga version for comparison.  Skip ahead to about 11:45 to see it.
Turrican II, Amiga - Part 1 - Overlooked Oldies - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=s7_8GcvOFI8#t=704s)

Just has me pondering... 

It does indeed have more impact - in fact the cpc version looks quite chaotic compared to the Amiga version's more conservative smart bomb.

Having looked at them both a few times, I don't know that the cpc version has more sprites on-screen...

However, this is a classic case of doing more with less.
What they've done is to shake the screen using the character-based scrolling method, and flash colours quickly. And that makes it look particularly violent. It's very clever and very effective.

Quote from: ervin on 01:41, 17 May 13
Having looked at them both a few times, I don't know that the cpc version has more sprites on-screen...

Looks to me like it does.  Look at the diagonal line of blue sprites appearing in the CPC version (starting from Turrican's gyroscope form).  That's his normal 360 weapon maxed out in there using a lot of sprites.  The Amiga version doesn't even use it's version of that weapon during the attack.

Quote
However, this is a classic case of doing more with less.
What they've done is to shake the screen using the character-based scrolling method, and flash colours quickly. And that makes it look particularly violent. It's very clever and very effective.

Yeah.  I'm certainly gonna do some of that (already got screen shaking code running and certain things set it off if they exploded or if I need a 'rumbling')  although colour changing is something that was easier on the older computers than modern ones.  On an 8 or 16 computer they used indexed palettes and it was easy to change the value of a colour and the sprite to appear in that new colour.  On modern systems it's not quite that simple it would appear.  At moment the only real options I seem to have are to have pre-recolored versions of every sprite that ever changes colours (kinda messy and not very flexible as every single colour variation would need new sprites) or this trick of saving the sprite out into temp folder in gif format, having the game actually modify the hex value of the gif file to change the colour value and then loading it back in.  Which if done a lot can potentially be quite slow.  Another option is that I can recolour things to one colour (which is what I use for when things get hit they flash solid red or when invincible you flash solid white) and that by splitting every sprite into it's seperate colours I can easily change each colour individually.  But this means a single 16 color sprite now would then be consisting of 16 sprites and to do that for every sprite and tile in the game would really be a headache-inducing mess.  Oh well, I'll think of something.   :)

Quote from: Carnivac on 08:29, 17 May 13
Currently reworking 'Cosmic Prison Commando' in the hope a CPC coder would like to code it for a real CPC.

Just googled for that... the youtube video looks really nice! :)

Quote from: ralferoo on 09:45, 17 May 13
Just googled for that... the youtube video looks really nice! :)

???
youtube video?   I wasn't aware there was still one.  I never made one myself.   If there is one on there it's likely of the old 2008 demo which I'd rather people ignored as it's not really what the game is like now. 

edit:  Just found it.  Yeah I had no idea that video existed.  Hm, the guy playing seems to hold the fire button down almost all the time and the sound effect sure gets annoying.  Never really occured to me people do that.  I tend to only shoot when there's something to shoot at.  Am pondering what to do about that.  I had been thinking of gun upgrades being limited ammo, so you wouldn't just keep shooting or else you'd run out of good ammo and be stuck with your default weak but infinite ammo.

Cheers for mentioning that video.  Given me something to think about.   :)

I'm pissing my pants with what I'm seeing here.

Quote from: Gryzor on 11:36, 19 May 13
I'm pissing my pants with what I'm seeing here.

I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing.  Either way I certainly don't want to be responsible for urine-soaked underwear...

(http://media.tumblr.com/bfd6057a018f45b968302163d4bed3d0/tumblr_inline_mn4734WzYd1qz4rgp.png) (http://media.tumblr.com/301ef9c5c2bcd544be26927fc1eb6dcb/tumblr_inline_mn4676fCQ01qz4rgp.png)

Little robot found gems!
(that be the little robot buddy that the main character sends out to go into tiny tunnels to collect goodies and activate switches and such.  He's just in this not-small cave shot for testing purposes.)

Dude you're still as good as I imagined... :-[

Was getting a bit bored of the outdoors tiles so for a change I've started to revamp the castle tileset.  This screenshot is a mock up testing them. Quite happy with how they're looking so far (though still need a lot of work).  The old bricks were far too bright and noisy.

(http://media.tumblr.com/5700953abed7513b811468e8720fe6cc/tumblr_inline_mn5ha892X51qz4rgp.png) (http://media.tumblr.com/59f9bb3dbe4b4b36de918fdd4a4c3760/tumblr_inline_mn5gsga1Lv1qz4rgp.png)

Hey Carnivac, if you still need help in the sound department give me a shout  ;D

Quote from: McKlain on 15:16, 21 May 13
Hey Carnivac, if you still need help in the sound department give me a shout  ;D

Thanks!  Will do!

Looking good.

How do you control the robot?

still I don't remember my CPC having that much heavy scanlines effects on real monitor...


My EGA had as his native resolution was 640x350 so when it displayed a 200 vertical resolution you effectively had black lines between colour lines.


But not on CPC as it is well scaled with the RGB monitor native resolution (768x272...) you actually don't have scanlines effect.

Quote from: sigh on 00:07, 22 May 13
Looking good.

How do you control the robot?

Still trying out some ideas for that.  The current and most likely is that there are 'switch-over' points just before a section the robot is required for, indicated by a tile on the ground where you press down and the robot jumps out of Jack (he's really stored in the backpack but there won't be enough animation to show that accurately). Jack then stands still while the player controls the robot to do whatever needs to be done then you make the robot jump back into Jack (often he's where you left him and other times something the robot did makes Jack now appear in a new location) to make the robot disappear and transfer control back to him.  They're only shown together in that mock up castle shot like that so I can see they both stand out well enough against these new tiles.

Quote from: MacDeath on 03:37, 22 May 13
still I don't remember my CPC having that much heavy scanlines effects on real monitor...

I don't find them 'heavy' at all.  To me they're natural and what I use in every emulator and retro game where the option is available (even on PS3 re-releases of old games) as I find modern displays too 'clean' for low resolutions and this is the best and easiest way to break that up without adding extra colours and messing up the pixel work.  Even CPC emulators have it (on WinApe it's done by having the option 'Render both pixel lines' turned off in the Display menu, and JavaCPC has a scanlines option in it's Video settings which I use too).   This is my preferred method of displaying low res games on modern monitors and TV's.    The game does have options to turn it off though and to make the lines various degrees of transparent (but I hate that cos then it adds extra colours and that annoys the hell out of me).

Well, you may notice the scanlines on an Amstrad monitor, as we all had to have the monitor pretty close to the computer. But on a big CRT tv, you don't use to play that close (an so, you barely notice the scanlines).

Have had a few people ask me if I'm going to do a '16-bit style' version (in particular one guy specifically asked if it were possible to get an Atari ST version someday).  May or may not happen. Certainly wouldn't do a whole new version but what I am doing is slightly rewriting some code to incorporate variables in case I may choose to have regular pixel size sprites in there which would be redrawn but use the same game engine (at the moment the wide-pixel look is achieved by having regular pixel sprites which look thin but then stretch out as the display is drawn double width in real time).  But also the frame rate would be smoother as it would be multiplied from the current amount so there's a variable in there too to decrease the amount the sprites and scrolling move in so the game runs at the same speed, just smoother frame rate if the option is activated.  This being because I was playing the old 2008 demo yesterday and it now seems ridiculously and unnaturally smooth in comparison (cos my eyes have gotten so used to the lower frame rate it has now to be more like CPC) and hadn't realised how much it had changed.   Which then made going back to the newer more CPC-authentic demo difficult to adjust to for a while as it seemed ultra jerky til I got used to it again.   So yeah I may do an ST/Amiga style 're-skin' for it which then activates the smoother frame rate as well (though I doubt a 16 bit version would be quite as smooth as the old demo... that can be extra Turbo Boost mode perhaps) but for now I'm focused on doing it CPC-like as was the whole point in the first place.  It's just best to get into the habit of writing the code to take into account the possible future graphics modes starting now rather than rewrite loads and loads of it later. 

man, that was slightly rambly... My excuse is I been up all night...

Quote from: MacDeath on 03:37, 22 May 13
But not on CPC as it is well scaled with the RGB monitor native resolution (768x272...) you actually don't have scanlines effect.

The scanlines were definitely there! The easiest way to see is to set the background to white and foreground to black.

If you have the brightness set too high, then the effect of scanlines will be minimised as more phosphor would be hit by the wider electron beam and so the surrounding pixels would glow too.

The other thing is that on a proper monitor, you were seeing a 312.5p image displayed at 50Hz, on a TV it might well have interpreted the image as a 625i displayed at 25Hz. The actual effect is that every alternate field would be shifted vertically to fill in the gaps from the previous field, which would minimise the scanline effect as that's exactly why we have interlacing on TVs.

TVs are actually designed to have phosphor that glows longer than monitors to help with the interlacing effect, because on a TV you want the phosphor to glow for at least (1/25)s whereas on TV or monitor you want (1/50)s, (1/60)s or (1/75)s etc depending on the expected refresh rate so that frames don't blend into each other. This is actually why old CGA monitors looked good at 60Hz but 60Hz modes looked really flickery when monitors started being able to support 75Hz or 100Hz - because the phosphor glow was decaying more quickly it made it appear to flicker when being used at 60Hz.

Quote from: MacDeath on 03:37, 22 May 13still I don't remember my CPC having that much heavy scanlines effects on real monitor...

Because a real CTM don't have a so much scanline effect.
Its just an easy odd/even "60Hz old monitor like" geek effect as you can see on the R-Type introduction sequence.  ;D

On a real CTM, it look more like that:
Stillrising04.png (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/imgs/e/e8/Stillrising04.png)

QuoteI don't find them 'heavy' at all.

I guess a more proper scanling effect would be a 1/3 scanline.
So you get a x3 magnification for mode1 pixels (3x3, 6x3 in mode0) and only get one black line per 3 instead of on per 2. Slighter.
Not sur it is possible or easy to get that kind of effects and yeah its can't perform well Mode2 unless you go for a 1/4 scanline perhaps?


Concerning 16bit versions...


ST : square pixels, 320x200... 16 on 512 colours.  offers quite few palette challenge actually.
Same palette is used by MegaDrive, perhaps PCengine too... jsut they have more palettes because or tiles and sprites in hardware management and multiple palette.


EGA/Tandy/CGAmstrad : this could really be a challenge.
Those only use a 16 colour palette (the CGA palette) but with this 320x200x16 or even 640x200x16.


http://www.technologyuk.net/computing/computer_systems/images/display_adapter_10.gif (http://www.technologyuk.net/computing/computer_systems/images/display_adapter_10.gif)


(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f4/CGA_palette.png) (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f4/CGA_palette.png)
(http://www.technologyuk.net/computing/computer_systems/images/display_adapter_10.gif) (http://www.technologyuk.net/computing/computer_systems/images/display_adapter_10.gif)
(http://www.technologyuk.net/computing/computer_systems/images/display_adapter_10.gif) (http://www.technologyuk.net/computing/computer_systems/images/display_adapter_10.gif)
(http://www.technologyuk.net/computing/computer_systems/images/display_adapter_10.gif) (http://www.technologyuk.net/computing/computer_systems/images/display_adapter_10.gif)


As it is a fixed palette  you can't get more than 2 shades in same hue.
But with the CGAmstrad 6470x200x16 it has a sweet dithering possibilities.

A realy exotic and excellent old format would definitaly be the high resolution EGA.

640x350x16 /64.
it can use the real EGA palette (the same as Sega master system) but was very particular...
the 640x350 is odd.
the vertical 350 can't really mix with standard vertical 200, 240 or 400 & 480 (or even 256-272 from a CPC).
Pixels in such mode actually had an irregular pixel ratio.


As it had a  640x350 resolution fit into a 4:3.
This mode had no scanline at all (it's really an high resolution) but its real pixel aspect ratio is somewhat almost impossible to emulate properly on modern computers, unless you really have a big one with shittons of resolution...

The pixel aspect ratio is something like 0,729... I guess to properly emulate it you need a big magnification to get it with square pixels

or simplify it into 0,75 so a x4 magnification may work, giving  1 pixel in 3x4 pixels magnification (slightly vertical)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_resolutions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_resolutions)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_display_standard (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_display_standard)

Looking the CTM dot matrix, you can see that vertical lines spaces are more important than horizontal lines.
The picture will look more like that, than black scanlines.

[attachimg=2]

I have a scanline variant for vertical lines already in there.  I just don't like it so it's not the default.  I can't do one that replicates the shape of the CPC monitor more accurately as it would require a much higher resolution than what I'm dealing with. 

If you don't like the real CTM render, don't fake it and keep your graphics with the original size.
They look so better w/o any effect like on your nice sign. :)

Sorry, but I really, really dislike it without the scanline effect at all and I would have posted the screenshots without them myself I had wanted to.  As I've tried to say before I HATE the clear and clean look of modern monitors when it comes to low res games.  And that my current default scanline effect is a quick, easy way of breaking up the pixels somewhat without adding any more colours (so that the palette of the image is identical to the in-game assets) and not impacting processor speed at all.    The reason the sig image isn't using them is due to size.  And even then I really dislike it and I was thinking of removing it.

I do appreciate seeing what you did to filter the castle tiles screenshot in your previous post though just to give me a rough idea of how it may look if it ever does get made for a real CPC someday.  Now that I examine it I can see it's a transparent mixture of both the horizontal and vertical lines I already have in the game engine and can add it as an option. 

Now can we be done with this? 

Sure, I understand your point of view because I disliked the PC lowres render in 80/90s years too.
In all case, I resize your pictures to see your real pixel work. :)

I'm using a "store" texture effect on Paint Shop Pro.
1- 200% original image pixel resize
2- 50% vertical store with black colour (2lines set)
3- 10% horizontal store with black colour (2lines set)

Those values are more or less close to what I can see on the AMSTRAD "zoom" on the picture, but not perfect and could be improved a lot!!!

Nice work guy!  8)

Ok, just to try please you I've made both scanline overlays (horizontal and vertical) now able to appear at same time and each have their own seperate options of transparency (0-10... 0 means they turn off, 10 means full black, so you can have horizontal using 1 and vertical using 5 if you so choose) so you'll be able to fiddle about it with however you want and they will save to the ini file.


Now I want to just get on making the actual game rather than wasting more time with the 'simulated effects'.   ???

There, with only 1 line in 3 in black.

How do you produce your scanline effects ?
Is it something you do in Photoshop?
You just apply a "gamma" grid ?

Would be nice if there would be more options or plugins to manage it betterly; be it control on the magnification, control on the pixel aspect Could be possible to cut a bit the angles with antialiasing so the pixels would look slightly less squared.

Also from what I remember on my EGA monitor, those Scanlines affects are not always plain black lines...

clear colours would actually have a darker colours as scanline : dark red shadow scanline" for a pink pixel, per example.
But Dark Red or most dark colours would have it in black of course.


Yeah Toto's examples are more close to reality.
This said, sorry if we wasted time on this topic, but I find it interesting anyway.


if you post 1:1 or 2:1 scaled pictures, I don't thing it is possible to apply scanline/rendering simulation anyway... as it takes too much part of the "pixel".
really need a minimum 3:1 scale.

Quote from: Carnivac on 14:56, 22 May 13Now I want to just get on making the actual game rather than wasting more time with the 'simulated effects'.   ???

Absolutly. Good luck in your work!!!

Scanlines are good. It may look good in its original size (160x200?), and it may have looked gorgeous on a CTM, but heck no on my 24" monitor, at half a meter from my eyes. So yes please.


A 16-bit version... hmmmmm, very interesting! Are you turning into the sequel of Ocean? :D

Quote from: Gryzor on 15:29, 22 May 13
Scanlines are good. It may look good in its original size (160x200?), and it may have looked gorgeous on a CTM, but heck no on my 24" monitor, at half a meter from my eyes. So yes please.

I play it with my laptop outputting to the 32" HDTV fullscreen (and played with a PS3 Dual Shock 3 controller, ok that's not very authentic but I don't have a way of connecting my old style joystick to the laptop.  More used to d-pads these days anyways)  :)

Quote
A 16-bit version... hmmmmm, very interesting! Are you turning into the sequel of Ocean? :D

Wouldn't be a true 16-bit-style version.  Just smoother running with reskinned graphics and probably a slightly larger screen area.   Hm, I kinda miss Ocean.   Got CPC and Amiga games often for birthdays and christmas and at least one per event tended to be an Ocean game. And for the most part I enjoyed them.  :)

Hm.  Slight hiccup when rewriting the scrolling code had it 'scrolling' by the same size as the screen resulting it in seeming very much like a 'flick screen' type of game.  Was kinda cool.  :)

edit: Actually if it was a flickscreen game it could probably have a much bigger screen area and likely run a lot smoother on a real cpc.   Just thinking stuff...

Quote from: Carnivac on 17:36, 23 May 13
Actually if it was a flickscreen game it could probably have a much bigger screen area and likely run a lot smoother on a real cpc.   Just thinking stuff...

Might not be a bad idea to have a bigger play area and then see what a good programmer can do...!

Of course it's good to be aware of the CPC's limitations, but techniques have got better since the 80s/90s development and it's always good to try and really show off what the platform is capable of.

And there's always hardware(ish) scrolling.    ;)

Maybe.  I'm quite enjoying playing about with it this flick-screen code even with the current size screen.  A bigger screen sure would let me have some interesting room layouts and I certainly find level designing a hell of a lot easier when it's flick screen as it can be done in more managable chunks then.  I find designing scrolling levels can get a bit out of control and unwieldy.  I'm gonna have to think about it some more.

Couple of test shots of screen size if I do change it permanently to flick screen rather than scrolling.

First up is using the full 160 width of the Mode 0 screen.  Which does seem to have a lot of room.  This actually works out to be the same play area as SwitchBlade (though obviously in a different resolution).  Makes this sample shot look a bit too widescreen area but could be because there isn't actually much going on in this particular bit. With more platforms and a slightly busier layout it such as the caves or castle area it could be suitable.  Definitely gives a lot more view in all directions which would make avoiding enemy attacks and some puzzles maybe easier to see too.

(http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/320d.png)


This one's had some chunks taken off each side to make the play area 128 pixels in Mode 0.  It makes it certainly seem more focused but if a CPC can use a full 160 width without too much in the way of speed problems regarding sprite movement and how many of them there are on screen at once maybe I should go with the bigger size...
(http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/256.png)


And yeahthis is if I even choose to do flick screen and abandon the scrolling.   


Decisions, decisions...

Bombjack could do with a face lift! A good game with graphic's which could be better defined!
Your stuff looks great btw!

Thanks.


Ok I'm building a series of test screens for flickscreen with screen width of 128 to see how it feels.  Gonna reprogram enemy behaviour so they stay within the confines of whichever screen they're in as well.

Ooops.  The 'screenshots' above were mocked up from the map editor and Jack has his old slightly fatter head there cos I forgot to update the marker of him (the fake sprite of him used to show his position on the map editor).

Anyways I've been testing some more and I really like the 128pixel width flick screen approach.  It's much less busy and I prefer designing the levels screen by screen.  The bigger play area means it's slightly roomier too and able too see obstacles and enemies easier (though not near the edges of the screen obviously but the level layout and enemy placement will be designed to take that into account)

Am wondering... how do I know how much memory my sprites and tiles would take up?   Just trying to figure out what I can and can't have on a 464.  And wondering some games had enough to do a couple of large images before the actual level takes place.  For example UN Squadron has the guy on the mission briefing screen and then all the graphics needing for the shopkeeper and the purchasable items and there's no loading between that and the level itself with all it's planes and tanks and bases (some of which are large) and shooting and tiles and even music all happening from a cassette loaded on my 464.

Played a bit with JavaCPC and Paint... ;)

(image has original size)

Heh, nice.  I been playing about with javacpc too.  :)

Anyways a few new screenshots to show some changes such as that I'm now using a frame around the play area (made up of tiles from the status bar) and showing some of the 'story text' stuff.  I've found I'm much preferring the flick-screen style than full-scrolling it used to have.  Makes things a lot easier to get done too. 

(http://media.tumblr.com/2563f119b6762ae51c3c2f918e552501/tumblr_inline_mnrk7aX4vx1qz4rgp.png) (http://media.tumblr.com/2563f119b6762ae51c3c2f918e552501/tumblr_inline_mnrk7aX4vx1qz4rgp.png) (http://media.tumblr.com/53be976bbaf275ff9acfcb1ccfd8d8e8/tumblr_inline_mnrk50tsNW1qz4rgp.png) (http://media.tumblr.com/53be976bbaf275ff9acfcb1ccfd8d8e8/tumblr_inline_mnrk50tsNW1qz4rgp.png)
(http://media.tumblr.com/302032fd4afba0d46a7d38f043e5857b/tumblr_inline_mnrlnsKa4b1qz4rgp.png) (http://media.tumblr.com/302032fd4afba0d46a7d38f043e5857b/tumblr_inline_mnrlnsKa4b1qz4rgp.png) (http://media.tumblr.com/a5b7b21b20794ce6412a53177335174d/tumblr_inline_mnrlr2f5pX1qz4rgp.png) (http://media.tumblr.com/a5b7b21b20794ce6412a53177335174d/tumblr_inline_mnrlr2f5pX1qz4rgp.png)

This is really looking promising.

I have come round to the flick screen idea now, especially as you've added the storyline approach which means you can have puzzles too and make the game more interesting than just a straight forward blast em up!

Quote from: redbox on 13:14, 02 June 13
This is really looking promising.

I have come round to the flick screen idea now, especially as you've added the storyline approach which means you can have puzzles too and make the game more interesting than just a straight forward blast em up!

Well there was a sort of story before but there's more of it now (not too much, I hate lengthy cutscenes like Metal Gear Solid), just enough to establish the events and characters and a bare-bones plot.   And yeah there are some puzzles mostly involve standing some place or shooting some particular thing.  Some may involve a bit of thought and others a matter of shooting at the right moment (like shooting between the gaps of multiple moving pillars so the shot passes through them all to hit a switch).   Originally it was pretty much Turrican-lite but it's now got elements of other favorite platform shooters I enjoy including modern ones like Ratchet & Clank (the robot buddy is an obvious clue to that inspiration even though I didn't realise that's where I got the idea from at the time).

The flick-screen approach makes mapping a hell of a lot easier for me and it's easy to assign a grid reference for each screen now (so say you're stuck on a puzzle in room 6,9... being 6 across 9 down)

Currently optimising the hell out of my current outdoors/caves tileset to save memory.  By making the tile size 4x8 rather than 8x16 I can see a LOT of duplication like in cases where for example a corner rock tile was the same as the middle but with the edge rounded off a bit.

At moment I am redoing the door tiles to be much more flexible and able to be all sorts of sizes, and to be made of a wooden plank tile that can also be used for the fences, interior building flooring and also wooden crates. 

So far the new tilesheet is about a third of the size of the old one and I'm not finished optimising it yet.   Ok it's more fiddly to do the level layouts now the tiles are smaller sizes but worth it as they extra flexibility in placement now too.  It's just the rock tiles and all the variations that blend into the ground which are going to be slightly headache-inducing to lay out.

edit:  Now I've made it possible to go through doors into those buildings I realise just how bloody tiny that building in my previous screenshots post really is.  Can barely jump around in it.  Have to remember that when laying out the proper level screens.

Tile testing of the new smaller but more flexible tile size and new wood tiles that are shared between the door, crates, floors and the (not seen here) fences.  Made the windows bigger so I could fit in some of the sky and mountain tiles to give the illusion there's an outside too.  That elevator is a little bit high tech looking for this building.  It's from the later more sci fi looking stuff but I haven't yet done the wooden elevator sprite yet so he's got that one to go up and down on for now.   Obviously this test shot is too big for a screen but it's just to check the tiles look ok before I sort out the tilesheet order and put them in the game and also testing how I want the interiors of the buildings to look like when properly tiled (at moment in the game they're very shoddily put together as they simply exist to check the entering/exiting door code works... which it does, yay!).  The floor/ceiling between rooms will likely be 32 pixels high so you have a noticable floor in the top bit and ceiling when in the bottom. 


(http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/interiortest2.png) (http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/interiortest2.png)


right my eyes hurt from all the fiddly tiny tiles in blocky wide-pixel vision... I need a break.  Is dinner time anyways.  :)

Quote from: Carnivac on 13:09, 02 June 13
Anyways a few new screenshots to show some changes such as that I'm now using a frame around the play area (made up of tiles from the status bar) and showing some of the 'story text' stuff.

Got to say, all these screenshots look phenomenal...  ;D

Thanks.  :)

Found another way to recycle some tiles.   The bridge hand rail thingy bits can now be used for bannisters for the stairs inside buildings.  They look different enough in that the bridge uses both the diagonal and straight strut tiles and the bannisters use just the straight struts for balconies and the diagonal end bits for going along the steps.  For example:

______
/|\|/|\|/|\
bridge
       ________
    _/| | | | | | |
_/|
/|
bannister


Also thinking more about controls.   Trying to get as much as I can onto a 1 fire button joystick.

Some notes about controlling (other than the obvious) are listed here.  These may change as development continues but at moment they work pretty well:
Currently holding fire button down while moving shoots and locks your direction for strafing so if you wear facing left and about to turn right, holding fire keeps you shooting to the left and when going right you walk backwards to the right. 
Holding fire button down for a couple seconds while standing still for a couple seconds opens a quick little menu of icons around the player (which pauses the game).  I haven't yet designed it fully though one of the icons is for the smart bomb.   Letting go of fire closes menu, but pressing a direction towards an icon chooses that.  So if the smart bomb is in the down icon, you hold fire to open menu, press down and he'll use a smart bomb.  Works great once you get used to it and which functions are in which direction.  If I end up with more than 4 functions (I don't want to assign anything to diagonals as they can be clumsy to use) I may have to modify it so that up and down are your quick functions and left and right cycle through the others (perhaps like the ring menu system in the SNES game Secret of Mana) but I shouldn't need more than 4.  It's not a ridiculously complex game.

Jumping is sort of disabled on elevators as pressing up makes the elevator go up.  However if you walk left or right a little bit and then press up you will jump while on the elevator. So basically jumping straight up is not possible on an elevator (but you're going up anyways).
Crouching is disabled on the elevator as pressing down makes the elevator descend.  However if the elevator cannot go down any more than possible, pressing down does make you crouch.  Crouching isn't essential on elevators anyways as you already go down.
Jumping is disabled when the majority of the player sprite is touching the door as pressing up centres you on the door and you go through it.

Updated the previous mock up so look up there (and may need to refresh it).

Redid the wood tiles slightly and happier with their texture now.  Added drawer tiles to be seperate drawer units like on the bottom right or used with door tiles to make the wardrobe as shown on the upper floor.  I've currently got it using the dialogue detection object so you can 'search' the wardrobe (will likely add it to the menu thing I mentioned above, possibly as the 'up' icon) and see if you get something in return such a a gem or something more important (such as the disk needed to reprogram one of the small security robots and turn it into your robot buddy).   Gonna use some of those tiles with some other new ones to make a bed too as I want these buildings to look a bit like they were lived in before the game is set.   Added some cobweb tiles too to make the place look abandoned and can reuse those in the caves and castle areas too.  Have done a brighter variant of the lower door tiles that are used as the tops of crates and floors to show help show that those are able to be walked on. 

Hm... looking at it if I do two small drawer units with a gap between and put a wooden piece across the top, I'll have a decent looking desk too.  I can make a little computer to put on it.   ACTUALLY I ALREADY HAVE!  Of course... I can use the Amstrad CPC collectable item I've had in there since the original demo.   Heh... YEAH, the occupants of this planet can all have been CPC users before their demise.  hehe...

edit:
Like so (http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/cpccollect.gif)  Makes more sense having them on a desk (or any piece of furniture) than mysteriously hanging in the air like they did in the old demo.   Yay for stuff that makes sense!

That's going to be amazing, Carnivac. You're doing God's work, son!

Love the li'l CPC in there :D


Also, the windows look lovely; will the 'outside' scroll, or is it static?

No scrolling, sorry.  Backgrounds are largely static tiles ('cept for the surface of water).  I'm trying to keep most cpu speed stuff for the sprites and such.

Why is it that not very many people are keen on programming games on/for the Plus computers?Is it a case of not being familiar with how and what the plus's features are, or just because they're lot less of the Plus machines about to cater for. I ask this without meaning offence to you programmers, I am in awe of your skills and knowledge!! I just thought that You all, would be interested to see what the unit was capable of. Especially with the facility of Winape , people have easy access to play the game more than ever, I know it is not the same,but still.

Ugh... what does that have to do with anything?   I have zero interest in the Plus machines... they simply just do not have any appeal to me in the way the original CPC specs do. 

Noticed it on the bottom of your sig.

For me, and I suspect a lot of others, the plus wasn't part of my memories. I grew up with a 464 and kind of always wanted a 6128 (or at least a RAM pack and a disk drive) but got an Amiga instead.

I hadn't even heard of the plus until a few years ago and so whilst I do have one now, it barely gets any use because I'll just use a 464 if I want to use a real CPC.

I apologize  for taking it off topic Carnivac, somewhat lazy of me not looking for the correct thread.
As you were....

Sorry Puresox I didn't mean to snap or anything.  Just got me at a bad moment (just being notified of a funeral of a family member so feeling a bit all over the place).

But yeah to me the Plus just isn't one thing or the other.  It's some weird in-between of the CPC and the ST/Amiga but doesn't really offer much in it's own way of anything.  Like it's got no identity of it's own.  And when it came out it just seemed quite pathetic trying to take on the market which was by that time dominated by the Amiga 500.  If I want the 4096 colour palette I'll just skip the Plus and do an Amiga game and use pixels of normal square shape but I'm much more fascinated with what can be achieved with 'limitations' such as the original CPC's 27 colour palette.  Heck, I'm typing this on a laptop with much higher resolutions and millions and millions of colours undreamed of back in the 8-bit era and yet I find relatively low colour palettes and resolutions are almost infinitely much more interesting for me to work with (and much more managable too).

No worries,Cheers.
I can see your reasoning behind it. It's a shame really as I expect that is the case with lots. Never mind , It's pleasing that there are many people developing great stuff on the old machine. For that I can be grateful.

Yeah.  I get why people with Plus machines like them and that's cool.  Nothing against that as such.  It's just not for me is all.

I actually never had one, but they intrigue me. Anyway I'll let things get back on track.

Quote from: Puresox on 15:51, 07 June 13
I actually never had one, but they intrigue me.

That might be one of the problems; most coders i know wouldn't trust what they'd written without having at least having access to a real machine for testing.

Quote from: Puresox on 15:51, 07 June 13Anyway I'll let things get back on track.

Oops, sorry. =-)

I saw a 464 plus for sale for £99 with monitor on ebay yesterday, I have a GX4000 so if I go for  Plus it will be a 6128

(http://media.tumblr.com/ec17597af8550a1bb0d04dca1c8f8ced/tumblr_inline_mo2o61lvc21qz4rgp.gif) (http://media.tumblr.com/89fc3db10ee9ad913b153764ecdac69a/tumblr_inline_mo2o6eWRDa1qz4rgp.gif)
The main characters of 'Cosmic Prison Commando'.  Both were prisoners who survived the crash of the prison ship.  Both are playable but on different stages.  Jack is the 'hero' of sorts.  David is less so.   Their names actually do have some connection.  I won't say what yet.  They both are trying to get to the same destination though David is also more actively trying to sabotage Jack's attempts to get there.

Why not make one of them female? Probably too late by now, but it would add some interest...?

For so many reasons...

One being memory because these guys are designed to use the exact same leg sprites (as the legs have the most animation), co-ordinates, gunflash overlays and such so they have to be somewhat similar in shape and mass (they also share most sprites in something that happens later in the game but I ain't going to spoil that).   Besides I'm not a big fan of violence against women and these guys will be try to kill the crap out of each other.  Story-wise there were no women on the prison ship that these two were on being that it was a prison ship full of somewhat unpleasant male convicts.  There is likely to be a woman in later stages (there's a head done at moment, body won't come til I figure out who she is, what she does and what that means she will be wearing) but she will not have many sprites because she is not intended to be playable.  Another reason is I simply do not want a playable female character in this.  I've already got a female as the lead of my other game anyways mainly as a tribute to a past friend of mine even though I'm really not a fan of playing games as female characters. 

Fair enough, got more than I asked for :D

Yes.  Yes you did.  :)

Have increased the game screen area by 16 pixels because I wanted a bit of extra 'head room' for the characters when jumping about and such.  The total height of the game including game screen, border and status panel is now 200 pixels which I don't think should be much of a problem since it's flick screen anyways. 

Found another use for the wood tiles.  They make nice wooden roofs for a bit more building variety.  When testing I even made a nice little castle with turrets and a stable of sorts with this tileset.  Man, this is becoming an extremely flexible and efficient tileset.  Hehe...  I think the idea with the 'overworld' is that it was lived in by people who made medieval style housing as it's the best they could do with the materials provided but had limited technology (which be why they have 8-bit computers like the CPC).  The higher tech stuff is found later in the fortress and some of the caves which they were unaware of and is where the security droids emerged from.

Quote from: Carnivac on 21:47, 09 June 13
Have increased the game screen area by 16 pixels because I wanted a bit of extra 'head room' for the characters when jumping about and such.  The total height of the game including game screen, border and status panel is now 200 pixels which I don't think should be much of a problem since it's flick screen anyways. 

The best resolution is probably 256x256 on the CPC for this type of game.

It's then 32x32 CRTC characters and it enables the programmer to use fast sprites etc which will speed up the engine considerably.

I don't know what that means.  I'd rather not go any higher than 200 though for various reasons, both technical and aesthetic...

Quote from: Carnivac on 10:48, 10 June 13
I don't know what that means.  I'd rather not go any higher than 200 though for various reasons, both technical and aesthetic...

Well, "technically" 256x256 allows you to use much faster sprite routines on the CPC.  Faster sprite routines means more sprites, animation, explosions etc etc.

Smaller screens on the CPC are used because of scrolling...  so would be a shame to have a smaller playing field for no reason (if you're not scrolling).

Quote from: redbox on 11:46, 10 June 13
Well, "technically" 256x256 allows you to use much faster sprite routines on the CPC.  Faster sprite routines means more sprites, animation, explosions etc etc.

Smaller screens on the CPC are used because of scrolling...  so would be a shame to have a smaller playing field for no reason (if you're not scrolling).

I don't know.  I've just done a quick mock up of it using 256 height and I don't know if it looks any good.  We're so used to 'wide screen' images particularly in this age, it looks so weird having the display so very square.  What other action games used that size so I can compare?


Also I don't understand why it would be faster when it would need to be display a lot more of the 4x8 tiles on each screen. 

Quote from: Carnivac on 12:07, 10 June 13
I don't know.  I've just done a quick mock up of it using 256 height and I don't know if it looks any good.  We're so used to 'wide screen' images particularly in this age, it looks so weird having the display so very square.  What other action games used that size so I can compare?

Well, if you want the 'wide screen' look then use 320x200 (standard CPC size, which of course is 160x200 in MODE 0).  The 256x256 resolution just means faster sprite routines on the CPC because the sprite routines don't have to cross the page boundry.  See the wiki for a programming explanation (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/index.php/Programming:Fast_Sprites).

So in short, if you use 256x256, more can happen on the screen in one frame (sprite wise).  If you use 320x200, you'll have a nice big screen but the payoff will probably mean less sprites etc.  But if you're not scrolling the screen, on the CPC you may as well use one of these two options - there's no other point in limiting the screen size.

Quote from: Carnivac on 12:07, 10 June 13
Also I don't understand why it would be faster when it would need to be display a lot more of the 4x8 tiles on each screen.

Again, the tiles can be drawn quicker on a 256x256 screen - tiles are essentially sprites on the CPC, which are all software drawn.

I dunno.  320 looks too wide and 256 looks too tall.  There's a sprite size to screen size ratio I quite like how it as the moment.  I find the it's easier for the eyes to focus on the player sprite when the play area isn't too big. 

Also just wondering why do so many flick screen games not use a big play area then?  Even ones made in the last couple years (for example, Teodoro's play area is only 128 pixels high)

Quote from: Carnivac on 12:30, 10 June 13
Also just wondering why do so many flick screen games not use a big play area then?  Even ones made in the last couple years (for example, Teodoro's play area is only 128 pixels high)

Probably because it's a Spectrum port.  Also, it depends on the programmer.  Some might use small screen sizes because their routines aren't very fast.

But on the CPC, if you're not scrolling then you can use lots of nice methods such as fast sprites, dirty tilemaps etc so you can get lots moving on the screen.  Take a look at something like SyX previewed in this thread (http://www.cpcwiki.eu/forum/other-retro/uwol-quest-for-money-now-on-android!/msg61660/#msg61660).

Hello Carnivac,

If your game don't use scrolling (it's a design choice not a problem) and you like to use wide screen view, your game will match really fine on a 288x224 16K screen, like that:

I have just added a char column to your great GFx and expanded the score bar... Please, don't blame me for that, because it's a shame to make mockup from your work... But, it's a speaking example.


[attachimg=1]


Cheers,

  TotO.

Thanks totO.  I'm really not sure what I'm doing.

Here's a slightly out of date screenshot edited so the game area, frame and status panel are 256pixels tall total. 
(http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/cpctall.png) (http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/cpctall.png)

It's really a bit too square for my tastes and the player sprite somehow seems 'further away' than he did with a smaller play area.  I don't know what to do about all this really.  I cannot continue developing this project until I've made a decision.

Probably not the best screenshot to have used since that area doesn't make use of the extra space required (a much more platform-game-like screen would have worked better but the game is currently too broken for me to do that until the new smaller tiles are in there, the new game screen size settled on and I can get back to designing screens with the tiles)

@redbox that engine in that video sure did look pretty smooth.  Are the routines and code stuff that's commonly known to most CPC coders of today?

Quote from: Carnivac on 13:05, 10 June 13
@redbox that engine in that video sure did look pretty smooth.  Are the routines and code stuff that's commonly known to most CPC coders of today?

SyX is a very good programmer  :)

But yeah, something along those lines is of course feasible.

Quote from: redbox on 13:31, 10 June 13
SyX is a very good programmer  :)

But yeah, something along those lines is of course feasible.

I have no idea who, if anyone, will produce a true CPC version.  If I wasn't such a brainless fool who fails at logic I might try learning but it would still likely be never as good as someone who is experienced with the CPC could do.  Just trying to keep this PC version of it fairly simple.

Do you know if that engine showed in that video would run fine like that on a 464?

Quote from: Carnivac on 13:44, 10 June 13
I have no idea who, if anyone, will produce a true CPC version. Just trying to keep this PC version of it fairly simple.

There has to be a real CPC version of this, the graphics are fantastic!  Understand what you're doing with the PC version, but surely it's a good idea so that even this version is a true reflection of at least what's possible on the real hardware... for example, you've already decided not to scroll because it's tricky on the actual CPC.

Quote from: Carnivac on 13:44, 10 June 13
Do you know if that engine showed in that video would run fine like that on a 464?

Yes, that runs on a real CPC.  Good, isn't it?  :)

Quote from: Carnivac on 13:44, 10 June 13Do you know if that engine showed in that video would run fine like that on a 464?

That project was for 128 KBs, although since then i have reworked a lot of that for being able to use it in my projects for CPCs with 64 kbs of ram.

But i feel for making justice at your amazing graphic work, you will going to need or the extra ram or being a floppy game :)

Quote from: redbox on 14:20, 10 June 13
There has to be a real CPC version of this, the graphics are fantastic!  Understand what you're doing with the PC version, but surely it's a good idea so that even this version is a true reflection of at least what's possible on the real hardware... for example, you've already decided not to scroll because it's tricky on the actual CPC.

Yeah, I'm trying to make it CPC-like as possible to make it easier to port to a real CPC sometime but I'm mostly going by what I've seen in games running on my 464 as my technical benchmark of sorts and trying to match those.  I'm not a CPC coder so I'm unaware of what tricks and coding techniques have been developed since these old games I own were produced.  In some ways, not using a full large screen seems more authentic to the era though.   I'm struggling with this decision.

Quote from: SyX on 14:24, 10 June 13

But i feel for making justice at your amazing graphic work, you will going to need or the extra ram or being a floppy game :)

but the whole point of this project is that I always wanted to make a game running on my real actual CPC 464 the computer of my childhood I still own today.  No upgrades or anything.  Hence why I'm trying to use a lot of graphic tricks to recycle sprites and tiles as much as I can.  Also there are things I'm marking as non-essential 128k extras but the core game must be able to run that very 464 I that resides on my little 'retro' desk in my bedroom.   8)

Out of curiosity does anyone have the issue of Retro Gamer where a really old (and very much out of date and somewhat ugly) screenshot of this game was printed in?  Must be towards end of 2008 and beginning of 2009 I would assume.  Or maybe I imagined the whole thing.  I thought I had a scan of the page but I can't seem to find it where I would expect it. 

Quote from: Carnivac on 19:35, 10 June 13
Out of curiosity does anyone have the issue of Retro Gamer where a really old (and very much out of date and somewhat ugly) screenshot of this game was printed in?  Must be towards end of 2008 and beginning of 2009 I would assume.  Or maybe I imagined the whole thing.  I thought I had a scan of the page but I can't seem to find it where I would expect it.

I have it - I'll see if I can retrieve it later today, after work.

[EDIT] Alrighty, here we go.

This first one is the whole article, from issue 56 of RG.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/qfosckr0de6ilt8/scan.png?m (https://www.dropbox.com/s/qfosckr0de6ilt8/scan.png?m)

This next one is just the screenshot, enlarged.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/79q68yc82jn2j79/screenshot.png?m (https://www.dropbox.com/s/79q68yc82jn2j79/screenshot.png?m)

Wow... I can't believe that competition was almost 5 years ago!
To this day I still regret not finishing my entry (Sabre Wulf).

Thanks Ervin!  Much appreciated.   :)   Yeah.. almost 5 years has passed.  Seems crazy.  :o

Ok.  Here's a test shot of how it may look with the bigger game area as suggested.  Have also added some details to the sides of the frame and revamped the status panel a bit too.  The gameplay screen there is obviously copy/pasted from a previous shot as I haven't done new level layouts for the new screen size and tileset size.
(http://carnivac.co.uk/temp/cpcbig.png)
Before I proceed to begin making the new screen layouts does anyone have objections to the bigger size or why it may not work?

My pleasure.
:)

The new screen looks fantastic.
I think the dimensions work quite well actually.
Reminds me, funnily enough, of Ghosts n Goblins (arcade), as that has fairly square screen proportions as well.

Quote from: Carnivac on 12:32, 13 June 13Before I proceed to begin making the new screen layouts does anyone have objections to the bigger size or why it may not work?

I though that is useless to waste the playfield size with borders and displaying the game title on it.
Playing on a largest CPC area (if technically possible) will be better than on a Spectrum like...

But sure, it look already great like that. :)

Quote from: TotO on 15:44, 13 June 13
I though that is useless to waste the playfield size with borders and displaying the game title on it.
Playing on a largest CPC area (if technically possible) will be better than on a Spectrum like...

You mean the frame?   That serves a purpose because of the black borders of a CPC screen and to seperate the game area from the black borders (particularly on areas with a lot of black including the title screen and intro and anything with a space backdrop.  The lack of such in some 8-bit games that had mostly black backdrops like R-Type for example used to bug me like crazy), also for when the story dialogue is put on screen and also for consistency with other framed elements (such as menus).   And to be honest I quite like frames and it's one of many, many things I miss about many 8-bit home computer games.  Same goes for having the game name there too.  I resisted using the full logo as that is 32 pixels high whereas the name in just the regular font is 8.

Anyways I'm gonna make this the final screen change and get on with getting the new level started. Cos it's long overdue and I'm tired of running around the same few screens (which are now completely messed up because of the screen size changes).  :)

Yes, I'm speaking about the "pipes" frame.
Sure that look nice, but it's not interresting for the game itself.

If in 80s they added a frame (on Cybernoid for example) and the game title on screen, it's only to fill the area and hide the fact that the playfield can't be bigger w/o too much frame rate drop from the speccy ports.

Your game use colored backgrounds, so the playfield don't need to be delimited.
Because you don't use scrolling it will be better to take part of the CPC capabilities on this original game, instead of doing like on "ZX".

A wide 16K 144x224 mode 0 screen is more close to the CTM aspect ratio.
That will allow you to build more interesting action maps too.
(Like you does on your previous picture finally)

Quote from: TotO on 17:16, 13 June 13
Yes, I'm speaking about the "pipes" frame.
Sure that look nice, but it's not interresting for the game itself.

If in 80s they added a frame (on Cybernoid for example) and the game title on screen, it's only to fill the area and hide the fact that the playfield can't be bigger w/o too much frame rate drop from the speccy ports.

Your game use colored backgrounds, so the playfield don't need to be delimited.
Because you don't use scrolling it will be better to take part of the CPC capabilities on this original game, instead of doing like on "ZX".

A wide 16K 144x224 mode 0 screen is more close to the CTM aspect ratio.
That will allow you to build more interesting action maps too.
(Like you does on your previous picture finally)

There's no pleasing some people. 

The frame which takes up 8 pixels at the top.  4 pixels each side (which equal to same size as the 8 ) and NONE at the bottom since it's integrated into the status panel.   Hardly cutting much into the gameplay area (which I have already increased considerably).  To suggest otherwise is incredibly picky and fussy and annoys the hell out of me to be honest.

This is becoming like the whole scanline crap that gave me a major headache and made me consider just deleting the whole lot and finding some other hobby.   I just want to get on with it and make the levels... I neeeeed to feel like this project is going somewhere.  Not just the same thing over and over and over...  Meant to be fun.  Not work.  Cos I sure as heck ain't being paid for it.


edit: damn emoticons happening when you actually just wanted the text that triggers them...

Hey, don't get offended :) People will tell their opinion no matter what, and in any case feedback here has been overwhelmingly positive :) No need for you to get demoralized just because someone thinks something could be a bit better! :)

As big a playing area as possible , without effecting the flow of the game, Thats my 2 cents. Looks great anyhow.

Quote from: Gryzor on 18:23, 13 June 13
Hey, don't get offended :) People will tell their opinion no matter what, and in any case feedback here has been overwhelmingly positive :) No need for you to get demoralized just because someone thinks something could be a bit better! :)

Not offended.  Just fed up.  I think since this is MY project that nobody's paying me money to do and is my hobby to relax and have something creative to do and take my mind of the crap that's going on in my life, perhaps I should sometimes say SHUT UP and let me do what I bloody want.  Thing is it's been about really obnoxiously picky things like the scanlines aren't quite authentic (so I then added extra options despite the fact as a player I will never likely use them) or the frame is taking up supposedly valuable play area (which was only commented on after I already made a MUCH bigger play area).  Ugh... and it's trying to please everyone that's got me beginning to resent this project.  This is meant to be my little project to escape into away from my problems for a bit each day.  That's all.  Nothing special. 

Well, you can always lock the topic and be the only one posting in it? I think so, at least. People would still be thrilled to see it to its completion.

Quote from: Carnivac on 18:35, 13 June 13
Not offended.  Just fed up.  I think since this is MY project that nobody's paying me money to do and is my hobby to relax and have something creative to do and take my mind of the crap that's going on in my life, perhaps I should sometimes say SHUT UP and let me do what I bloody want. 

So, please, don't ask to peoples if they like or something else... Bye.

Please people let's calm down here...

Quote from: TotO on 18:45, 13 June 13
So, please, don't ask to peoples if they like or something else... Bye.

No... what I was saying was...  I can't just let other people dictate what I do.  At the end of the day it's MY decision. 

Quote from: Gryzor on 18:39, 13 June 13
Well, you can always lock the topic and be the only one posting in it? I think so, at least. People would still be thrilled to see it to its completion.

Nah, it's ok.  I'll take a time out and come back when I've got something worth posting like an actual level.  I'm sure everyone's as sick of seeing the same couple screens as I am.  :)   

Take care, folks.  8)

Serious discussion for a so small frame  :o
About this one , just a technical argument as i am not game designer but only a poor programmer  :laugh:
Problem with this frame is you will lost hability to do easily hardware scrolling.
I could speak more about realistic playfield size (surface can go up to 1024 chars) and panel size but it is only for 128K or ROM games so i think you'll not be interested as i understood you want to make only a 64K compatible version.I have no problem with this as it is your choice, just a shame as your graphics are georgeous.

Would be nice to see this game finished as the graphics are great.

I would have thought that by posting the previews on a forum you would be wanting and welcoming comment on them.

Also, by stating (again on a forum) that you aren't sure about the actual CPCs capabilities would also infer that you might need some help with this aspect of the game design, which is what people have been trying to help you with.

It would be a good idea to embrace this community as it's a valuable resource full of very talented people. And hey, it's always much more fun to create something together. 

It's looking great chap , don't pressure yourself on perfection , not sure how many games you have developed on the Amstrad, but your never gonna hit the spot with everyone , just satisfy yourself , not easy if your a perfectionist but, as long as it is a step forward from your last project on cpc I suppose. It is great to see development of this calibre still going on , so I am sure more people will be pleased with the results than not.

Quote from: Carnivac on 18:55, 13 June 13
No... what I was saying was...  I can't just let other people dictate what I do.  At the end of the day it's MY decision.

Damn right! You do what you want to do. I like the higher screen myself, I think it will allow for some interesting platform designs for a flip-screen platformer.


Great graphics btw.