View Single Post
Old 10 January 2020, 11:47   #20
Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,902
Originally Posted by jotd View Post
even OCS sprites aren't so bad, when porting old arcade games, the characters are often 16-bit wide and have ... 3 colors. Examples: PacMan, Bagman, ... I'm exploring this area now.
OCS sprites are quite capable when used well. They'd rock for older stuff for sure. Hybris could be seen as an inspiration here, every enemy is a hardware sprite.
Originally Posted by AmigaHope View Post
Still, the Amiga was so far ahead in 1985 in almost all respects, it's odd that its hardware sprites were on par (or SLIGHTLY better with hacks) with the 1982 Commodore 64, or comparable to the 1983 Famicom.
I feel some defense of the Amiga's sprites is in order, as I love them regardless of their many faults. So... Here goes

Amiga hardware sprites, for all their faults, are actually significantly better than either Master System or NES sprites in many ways. They cover more pixels horizontally (up to 128 vs 64) and can display more pixels without tricks (up to about 32768 vs 8192). They can also be horizontally multiplexed, which is something that none of the systems you name can do.

Similarly, Amiga sprites can actually cover way more pixels than the C64 sprites can - if no tricks are allowed. Depending on sprites being expanded or not, the Amiga can cover anywhere from 2x to 8x the number of pixels with sprites that the C64 can.

That said, if tricks are allowed C64 sprites do indeed become much better than Amiga sprites, certainly for the purpose of displaying game objects. However, don't forget the C64 relies almost exclusively on sprites for objects in games, while the Amiga does not. Sprites and the Blitter are meant to work together to make graphics, not just one or the other. With the Amiga, always consider all parts of the puzzle

Also... The C64 was pretty much the "outstanding outlier" in sprite abilities. No other 8 bit system of the early 1980's comes even close to what the C64 can do with sprites when well programmed. If it is pushed to extremes, it can actually pump out more sprite pixels in a frame than either the SNES or Mega Drive can without relying on trickery

(though I should mention that doing so would not be useful in the slightest for games )
If they'd just made the sprites 16 color by default (or allowed 16 4-color sprites per scanline), or just quadrupled the numbers, it would have made a big difference. A small 32k sprite cache to avoid constantly DMAing the sprites would have worked wonders (maybe allow sprites to DMA from chip memory or from cache, selectable)
Better sprites would have been very nice (and I'd love to have seen some of the stuff you mention, or options such as size doubling, etc), but they do not exist in a vacuum

Originally Posted by sokolovic View Post
I just don't understand why this hudge difference seems to be completely obliterated by people constantly comparing the 2 systems.
For a system that was 5 time cheaper, keep being compared to the beast that was the X68000 maybe prove that the Amiga wasn't such a big shitty machine like we can read here and there.

Last edited by roondar; 10 January 2020 at 11:51. Reason: Added my +1 to the whole X68000 discussion ;)
roondar is online now  
Page generated in 0.04336 seconds with 11 queries