Arcade / Console --> Amiga conversion discussions

[TuRRIcaNEd]

Originally Posted by zero

Just move the HUD off the main play area.

I'm not sure how many times I can say "I want to get as close as possible to the arcade visuals".

[saimon69]

Originally Posted by TuRRIcaNEd

I'm not sure how many times I can say "I want to get as close as possible to the arcade visuals".

You could play dirty putting the speedometer just below the car and just filling it with the road color :P so that you could reuse sprites

[TuRRIcaNEd]

As I said, I'm thinking we'll be trying the Lotus-based method first, in part because I know it works reasonably well - if we get that far and anyone else wants to fork the project and try the sprite method, they're more than welcome to do so!

[zero]

You would rather have the HUD in the right place than more on-screen objects, because somehow that's closer to the arcade visuals in your mind?

[saimon69]

hmm are we already at the HUDshedding stage? (pun intended) - i would say start build the thing and then do your tests and decide

[Amiga1992]

Gameplaying input from me if anyone cares:

The only things I ever cared for on the Out Run HUD display are:
- Time
- Gear

I guess to know when to switch gear, you need to see the speed. But, you could also find other clever methods.
Actually if you "gear gatcha", switching gear becomes less important. You should always know where you're at.

Agreed with saimon69, decide after it's built.
Personally, I'd favor roadside objects over HUD I guess.

[dlfrsilver]

Originally Posted by Akira

Gameplaying input from me if anyone cares:

The only things I ever cared for on the Out Run HUD display are:
- Time
- Gear

I guess to know when to switch gear, you need to see the speed. But, you could also find other clever methods.
Actually if you "gear gatcha", switching gear becomes less important. You should always know where you're at.

Agreed with saimon69, decide after it's built.
Personally, I'd favor roadside objects over HUD I guess.

Crazy Cars III is exactly what an amiga conversion of outrun should head toward.

[trydowave]

Going back to that Ghouls n Ghosts STE port. If im reading it right no amount of trickery can get the amount of animations frames into the max chip ram of 2mb. If thats the case could a similar port be possible (in theory) that, while, losing frames of animation, plays on the Amigas strengths, Such as smoother scrolling, more colours and improved sound?

[dlfrsilver]

Originally Posted by trydowave

Going back to that Ghouls n Ghosts STE port. If im reading it right no amount of trickery can get the amount of animations frames into the max chip ram of 2mb. If thats the case could a similar port be possible (in theory) that, while, losing frames of animation, plays on the Amigas strengths, Such as smoother scrolling, more colours and improved sound?

The game can run in 2mb of ram, at the condition to be splitted per objects and per levels.

Otherwise you're stuck with 14mb of ram needed.

[trydowave]

Originally Posted by dlfrsilver

The game can run in 2mb of ram, at the condition to be splitted per objects and per levels.

Otherwise, you're stuck with 14mb of ram needed.

A few questions:

1: Can you explain that splitted per object thing pls?

2: I only thought the STE could do 4mb max?

3: If I'm reading right this game is quite unaltered from the arcade data, is that the case?

4: Could an Amiga version use a similar trick, in the same way, say SWIV did and load sprite data as needed?

I'm no programmer but in the instance of Ghouls n ghosts, there's a small area just before the first boss, an empty area. No standard enemies. Couldn't all the boss sprite data be loaded in at that point (even if the game paused for a second while it loaded in)... from HDD fo course?

Thanks

[dlfrsilver]

Originally Posted by trydowave

A few questions:

1: Can you explain that splitted per object thing pls?

2: I only thought the STE could do 4mb max?

Coin-op machines work as unified architecture, this means that the game program is a huge block.

On a computer, a game is splitted as main code, sound files, level data files, and sprites data files.

Ex: Ghouls'n'Ghosts Amiga loads the main code, and level 1 in RAM.

The coin-op has all the main code + all the levels directly in memory. That's why the coin-op needs 16 mb of ram, when the Amiga arcade port (a real good one, not the us gold one) would requires 2mb of ram.

3: If I'm reading right this game is quite unaltered from the arcade data, is that the case?

The STE version use the exact arcade game logic, the arcade game code, with a 16 colors palette + an emulation of the CPS graphics chip basically. And it has a layer not activated so that the game don't slow down.

4: Could an Amiga version use a similar trick, in the same way, say SWIV did and load sprite data as needed?

the STE can access the whole range of memory. The Amiga can't. So the only solution is to break in pieces the arcade code, and also the game sprites.

I'm no programmer but in the instance of Ghouls n ghosts, there's a small area just before the first boss, an empty area. No standard enemies. Couldn't all the boss sprite data be loaded in at that point (even if the game paused for a second while it loaded in)... from HDD fo course?

Thanks

On Amiga, you'd need honestly a 1200 with a 68020 or better a 68030.

[TuRRIcaNEd]

Originally Posted by dlfrsilver

Crazy Cars III is exactly what an amiga conversion of outrun should head toward.

With respect - and I know some people really like that game - personally I thought it wasn't that great. It looked relatively pretty (if you like a lot of reds and browns ), but I never thought it moved that well.

The chief problem with trying to do OutRun using CC3 techniques is that CC3 didn't seem to be able to render hills with the necessary steepness required for converting OutRun.

[dlfrsilver]

Originally Posted by TuRRIcaNEd

With respect - and I know some people really like that game - personally I thought it wasn't that great. It looked relatively pretty (if you like a lot of reds and browns ), but I never thought it moved that well.

The chief problem with trying to do OutRun using CC3 techniques is that CC3 didn't seem to be able to render hills with the necessary steepness required for converting OutRun.

the hills ? CC3 use all type of sceneries, and is richer than the lotus series. and CC3 is currently more punchy in its animation than Lotus series.

the cars in CC3 move like a real car, in lotus not. In Lotus the car is almost stating at the center of the screen. in CC3, the car can move up and down left and right on the whole screen width.

that's basically what the outrun car is doing.

[TuRRIcaNEd]

Originally Posted by dlfrsilver

that's basically what the outrun car is doing.

Nope, it doesn't move from it's point on the screen.

And I'm sorry sir, but I think Crazy Cars 3 is awful compared to Lotus and XJ220.

[trydowave]

Originally Posted by TuRRIcaNEd

Nope, it doesn't move from it's point on the screen.

And I'm sorry sir, but I think Crazy Cars 3 is awful compared to Lotus and XJ220.

Agreed. crazy cars 3 is ok but nothing amazing. The way Lotus 2 fly's around those hills on level one still impresses me to this day. Lotus ain't no outrun but if any engine could be used for an outrun port then my money would on the Lotus 2 engine.

[TuRRIcaNEd]

Originally Posted by trydowave

The way Lotus 2 fly's around those hills on level one still impresses me to this day. Lotus ain't no outrun...

It's interesting you say that, because Lotus seems to be able to render really steep uphill and downhill sections. I've been dissecting OutRun for a while, and while it certainly renders steep uphill sections, none of the levels seem to contain downhills that are equivalently steep.

Also, in OutRun, the horizon line is almost always rendered at the last point at which the road is drawn. Lotus can do the downhill sections because it uncouples the horizon from the road.

[dlfrsilver]

Originally Posted by TuRRIcaNEd

Nope, it doesn't move from it's point on the screen.

And I'm sorry sir, but I think Crazy Cars 3 is awful compared to Lotus and XJ220.

I perfectly don't agree. Crazy Cars 3 has the richest sceneries of the 3, the best animation and best lightning fast speed of the 3.

Lotus and Jaguar cars are giving the illusion they are moving, when in fact they are static in the middle of the screen.

In Crazy Cars 3, the car can do cascade jump, and with a very realistic way of moving for the car.

[TuRRIcaNEd]

Originally Posted by dlfrsilver

Crazy Cars 3 has the richest sceneries of the 3, the best animation and best lightning fast speed of the 3.

With respect, I'm going to have to agree to disagree there.

Lotus and Jaguar cars are giving the illusion they are moving, when in fact they are static in the middle of the screen.

OutRun works in the same way (aside from the crash sequences)...

[Miggy4eva]

Originally Posted by dlfrsilver

The game can run in 2mb of ram, at the condition to be splitted per objects and per levels.

Otherwise you're stuck with 14mb of ram needed.

Is Ghouls n Ghosts on STE now running in 2MB?? In that case the last barrier is removed from how I understand. ECS at least can access 2MB as chipram.
So now we don't have the problem of too much sprite data for the Amiga to handle! Time to do Ghouls n Ghosts port finally, after all this talking??

[Retro-Nerd]

Crazy Cars 3 was barely average. What a boring game. Reminds me of 8bit games, especially gameplay-wise/physics.