Port Wolfenstein on Amiga 500 / 1000 OCS

[eXeler0]

Originally Posted by hooverphonique

Doing vertical blitter fill (2 xor'd sources, one destination) on a 320x256 3 bpl screen (and no other dma) takes more than 20ms, and slows the cpu a lot, so either low framerate or a small screen (or maybe even both) will be needed to do this in 16 colors (but the concept could probably work to render something non-textured, but with vertical strips colored according to distance from viewer/lightsource).

Could the Copper be used to something funky with the color palette of those strips (in real-time)?

[pipper]

One way to draw vertical single colored strips via the blitter is to use the line mode and encode the color Index into the line pattern. Setup the bitplanes as interleaved, but set the blitter modulo as if they were non-interleaved. The line width (I.e. the width of the strips) can be up to 16pixels this way. I once used this to draw strips in a Voxel space renderer with 256 colors. Still not fast, but allowed to draw the strips in a “chunky” fashion without having to use C2P. The downside is that 16must be divisible by the number of bitpla es, I.e. 1,2,4 or 8 bitplanes are supported)

[hooverphonique]

Originally Posted by eXeler0

Could the Copper be used to something funky with the color palette of those strips (in real-time)?

Practically not really, I'd say...

[LaBodilsen]

Originally Posted by hooverphonique

Doing vertical blitter fill (2 xor'd sources, one destination) on a 320x256 3 bpl screen (and no other dma) takes more than 20ms,

320x256 3bpl = 32kb, So for a 1x2 resolution screen in 4bpl (like 320x100) which is about 16kb, we might be able to vertical fill it in under a frame?

But as Britelite mentions, doing sprites/objects with this method might pose a problem.

[idrougge]

Originally Posted by Leffmann

It's not about the graphics, it's about how people join not to contribute or discuss, but to bully and shoot the thread down. It makes people wary of starting new discussions and sharing ideas, and only serves to quiet down the forum.

As far as I know, you're a very competent coder, Leffmann. Why not team up with Miggy4eva and bring this to fruition?

[Megol]

If someone really want this to happen why not contact ray* who did the ST/STe port and ask if he'd be interested in doing an Amiga port or helping in making one?

A raw conversion should be relatively easy by reusing the existing texturing code and adding Atari planar -> Amiga planar routine using the blitter. Sound code would have to be replaced as would misc. system interface code.

It wouldn't be a demonstration of Amiga supremacy of course. But it would be a playable game.
(* http://s390174849.online.de/ray.tscc.de/wolf3d.htm )

[Leffmann]

Originally Posted by idrougge

As far as I know, you're a very competent coder, Leffmann. Why not team up with Miggy4eva and bring this to fruition?

Thanks for the confidence, but it's above my level.

[Gorf]

Originally Posted by Megol

If someone really want this to happen why not contact ray* who did the ST/STe port and ask if he'd be interested in doing an Amiga port or helping in making one?
(* http://s390174849.online.de/ray.tscc.de/wolf3d.htm )

This port needs real FastRAM and at least 2 MB RAM in total.

Judging from the screenshots and videos of this port, using my sub-strips approach (mentioned earlier) would be enough to paint the walls with quite the same quality and the same appearance... but maybe faster and less RAM?

[LongLifeA1200]

Asking for source code is the same as giving up.

This thread should be more than just about simply porting Wolf3D to OCS - it ought to be about what the OCS system can achieve with the right game design considerations for any OCS game that plans to incorporate 2.5D/3D.

The aimed results shouldn't be too low either. A 3D/2.5D game in 2x2 pixel definition on a 160x100 screen isn't fun to play when it's also giving you a headache.

This is far from a quick 'n' easy task. A lot may end up changing. Even the music has to meet a certain standard. Remember this can't be a "lazy" port

Give it some time for people to study this.

[britelite]

Originally Posted by LongLifeA1200

Asking for source code is the same as giving up.

Yes, because reinventing the wheel is awesome.

This thread should be more than just about simply porting Wolf3D to OCS

Looking at the title of this thread, it's EXACTLY about porting Wolf3D to OCS. Feel free to start another thread for unrelated talk.

The aimed results shouldn't be too low either. A 3D/2.5D game in 2x2 pixel definition on a 160x100 screen isn't fun to play when it's also giving you a headache.

Why don't you show us how you'd achieve better results then? Or at least come up with some real concrete ideas for how to improve things, rather than demands on how something you're not involved in should look like.

[britelite]

Originally Posted by Megol

If someone really want this to happen why not contact ray* who did the ST/STe port and ask if he'd be interested in doing an Amiga port or helping in making one?

I've been considering this, as I have a few ideas that the ST-version might benefit from too (if not already implemented).

A raw conversion should be relatively easy by reusing the existing texturing code and adding Atari planar -> Amiga planar routine using the blitter.

Yes, but it wouldn't be too hard to redo the drawing routines and use a regular blitter c2p for minimal overhead. Or at least that's what I would do

[Foebane]

Why bother with Wolf3D when you can have Doom?

[britelite]

Originally Posted by Foebane

Why bother with Wolf3D when you can have Doom?

On A500? Are you kidding?

[Locutus]

Originally Posted by Foebane

Why bother with Wolf3D when you can have Doom?

Why bother with Doom when there's Battlefront.

(this is getting silly)

[Gorf]

Originally Posted by Locutus

Why bother with Doom when there's Battlefront.

(this is getting silly)

Ok let’s call the ministry of silly threads!

In contrast to some others I do not really expect a new version of wolf3d ...
I just find it interesting to discuss the matter and see if there would have been a way (back than) to bring wolf3d to the A500 ... somehow.

What tricks could have been used? What sacrifices would have been necessary?
Or ist it simply impossible to reach a reasonable frame rate?

[LongLifeA1200]

This would be the 3rd time I've seen a thread get derailed on this forum since I've joined a short time ago. Now I'm beginning to understand why people prefer to lurk instead. Is the OP's hopes high? Sure. Is that any reason to get "visibly" upset that someone in 2017 would show enthusiasm for a classic computer that few people still code for?

This negative attitude is disgusting. Nobody has any need to port (or make) any game for Commodore. They do it because they want to. Few people volunteer their free time as it is. Most people will simply give up upon realising the enormity of the task. You needn't add any effort in discouraging others if that's your aim.

Saying that 2.5D/3D on OCS is unrelated to this thread is plain trolling.

I have already noticed that people are just about ready to give up and that's fine. So forgive me if I want to do a little rallying.

The game needs to be redesigned to function competently. Even if all alternative options of an OCS-Wolf3D proves impossible, the discussion can prove useful to others who want to do a 2.5D/3D game of another kind. There is no need to start another thread when OCS-Wolf3D can serve as the case study.

[Samurai_Crow]

The Walls demo is what a stock Amiga 500 can do at full speed. That's a more realistic starting point. Texture mapping will kill it. Let's ditch the texture mapping for now.

[alpine9000]

Originally Posted by Samurai_Crow

The Walls demo is what a stock Amiga 500 can do at full speed. That's a more realistic starting point. Texture mapping will kill it. Let's ditch the texture mapping for now.

If you ditch text mapping, you could still have a cool game, but it's not Wolf3D.

Like every other Amiga owner at the time, when I saw that silky smooth texture mapped world flying by at what seemed an unbelievable frame rate, for the first time I saw something on a crappy PC that I knew my beloved Amiga could never do.

I would love to see someone prove 1992 me wrong, and do a playable wolf 3d.

But that sure it a lot of pixels to move around with such an ill-suited frame buffer layout and such limited ram bandwidth.

[Samurai_Crow]

Stencil mapping with bump mapping instead is easier to do, especially if we use the same storage format as the player models.

[Gorf]

Originally Posted by alpine9000

If you ditch text mapping, you could still have a cool game, but it's not Wolf3D.

there where always ports of games to very different platforms, that used completely different techniques than the original to archive something, that resembles that original to a certain degree.

Many games where available on various consoles, C64, Amiga, Atari or even PC.
These ports often looked quite different on each platform, but still they all got the same name and where marketed as the same game.

So something that gives you at least a nice 3d impression and uses most of the artwork and gameplay of Wolf3D can still be called Wolf3D - even if it does everything completely different under the hood.