Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag
Atari 2600 et al didn't even have a frame buffer, let alone hardware sprites. The CPU had to draw everything on the screen on each scanline as the vertical beam position reached it, much like the work the Amiga's copper has to do.
Other examples such as the relatively advanced Mattel Intellivision, the CPU had no access to graphics RAM or hardware registers outside of vertical blank. Also usually on machines of that era, if there was any static background graphics capability, it was "character based" displays with up to 256 8x8 characters in only two colours, which is much lower bandwidth. The later 16 bit consoles also used a variant of this technique but with more characters and more available colour combinations, which is very good for scrolling tilemap based games and perhaps how they managed so many hardware sprites. But the Amiga uses bitplanes which can be anywhere in Chip RAM and have to be read into the display hardware to be displayed on the screen.
C64 had only 16 colours anyway so what does "independent palettes" even mean in this case? They used the same colours you could use for the background graphics. On the Amiga if you are only using a 16 colour screen, your sprites use a different set of 16 colours. How independent do you want it?
Also I really want to clarify this. On the Amiga horizontal scrolling isn't what causes sprites to disappear. Setting the horizontal display fetch 16 pixels earlier (further left) disables the last sprite because the bitplane data has to be read during the time it would otherwise have read that sprite's data. You can do scrolling without doing that but not if you want the screen to go right to the left-hand edge. You will note that Turrican, for instance, doesn't go all the way to the edge, so I guess they wanted to use all 8 sprites.
Whereas the TI99/4A from the 70s does indeed have 16x16 pixel sprites with individual colour registers which pre-dates the Intellivision by 2 years. And the 1981 VIC-II chip may have only 16 colours but for the Amiga, as befits a machine 4 years younger than a C64 I don't expect the sprites to be thinner and not even have their own palette, however you paint it it IS a backward step for the sprite system on the Amiga. If the sprites can only take their colours from the background screen memory underneath then what is the point of having a 32 colour palette if you have to use half of them for the 8 three colour sprites, and if you then multiplex them using the GELs system of Kickstart again what is the point if multiplexing the sprite colour registers changes the colours on the background image, which again is not a problem on something like multiplexing sprites on a C64 (something so simple to do it took me just a few hours to do it in machine code on my second day of 6502 coding).
It is a very awkwardly implemented sprite system which most machines in the history of computing did not use and for a very good reason IMO.
The fact you only have 16 colours on the C64 is neither here nor there, because the multicolour screens have only 3 universal colours and one user selectable colour per 4x8 pixel charblock like most early 80s micros and so having an extra 2 colours universally and 1 per sprite means your sprites are designed independently of the background with their own registers which can then be changed when multiplexing them including their colours. This therefore means you double the effective number of colours on screen.
That was the whole point of sprites, that they are an independant hardware generated layer. If you can only put sprites on the screen that use the regular screen background colour registers then why would you use them and not BOBs? Amiga sprites have 50% of the limitations of Atari ST/Amstrad CPC software sprites therfore IMO because whilst the hardware is taking care of making sure they are refreshed on the screen without affecting the screen beneath you you still have to use a single palette for all (and then are not able to have say 6 colour cycling animation as the sprites using those colour registers would also get their colours cycled so no easy colour cycling water effects on a Twin Cobra/Ghost Pilots rip-off etc).
Again though like I said it doesn't really matter because I was just seeking clarification and the copper and blitter is the key to getting my game looking as close as possible to the SNES original game anyway and there are only really two huge animated characters on screen at a time (plus animated backgrounds). I will just use EHB colours in the opposite way intended so you can 'see through' your player and still hit the enemy. I just found it odd that Amiga sprites work in such an unusual way given it's such a graphical powerhouse
PS I did the longplay for SWIV on the C64 and apart from being technically very impressive for a conversion of an Amiga game I would also not have felt too sad if I didn't own an Amiga like my friends and had to play the C64 version instead. This is down to the sophistication of the C64 sprite hardware, and why it is the only 8-bit version worth playing and better than the ST version of the game IMO.