Kung Fu Master Port

[10shu]

Originally Posted by skyzoo73

Fantastic this game is getting cooler, congratulations!
It would be nice to expand on the idea of further dividing the character into moving parts. For example, the left shoulder and the arm up to the elbow, make them move up and down, in order to mimic the classic Bruce Lee movements. But perhaps having all these moving parts is too much for the Amiga500.

We cannot really change the sprites now. everytime i change it , it mean MCGEEZER must re-cut all the sprites in small little square, and reassemble it all in animation. it s a lot of time...i think it s better if he spend his time working on the game


I m pretty much done with all the art for this games now.
I m currently working on the box art for the games. we also have a few stuff we want to add as special easter eggs and stuff but i m almost done with kungfu master arts.

[10shu]

Originally Posted by chadderack

Wow... that looks fantastic. Great work, both of you.

Thank you.
we though it was good be not good enough so i ve reworked the asset last night... more coming soon

[x-vision]

Originally Posted by mcgeezer

As i'm looking to release a playable demo soon for a magazine I started working on the title screen as the main game engine is just about done (still lots to do though).

[ Show youtube player ]

Anyone want to have a go at how I'm able to move that foreground over the background? The foreground is 32 colours.

Geezer

Congratulations for your wonderful work on this port, you are getting almost a new game.

I just have a small "but..": Why always use only 32 colors when Amiga has 4096? HAM is perfect for title and cinematic screens, cause it make them they look a lot better.

[Mixel]

Originally Posted by x-vision

I just have a small "but..": Why always use only 32 colors when Amiga has 4096? HAM is perfect for title and cinematic screens, cause it make them they look a lot better.

.. No it doesn’t? I mean there’s a subjective element, but HAM is an absolute mess compared to crisp pixel art like 10shu’s?

Having a wider palette doesn’t necessarily help IQ, as the 4096 available colours still limits your choice of smooth gradients.. you just end up with weird HAM fringing for no benefit.
—

I love the perspective movement on the title screen.

[10shu]

Originally Posted by x-vision

Congratulations for your wonderful work on this port, you are getting almost a new game.

I just have a small "but..": Why always use only 32 colors when Amiga has 4096? HAM is perfect for title and cinematic screens, cause it make them they look a lot better.

Ham6 as plenty of rendering artefacts i m
Not a fan of.

Also the asset in ham take more memory

Finally i haven’t used a real amiga for a long time but from what i recall ham6 wasn’t really fast and not pratical for animation.

[x-vision]

Originally Posted by 10shu

Ham6 as plenty of rendering artefacts i m
Not a fan of.

Also the asset in ham take more memory

Finally i haven’t used a real amiga for a long time but from what i recall ham6 wasn’t really fast and not pratical for animation.

Programs for producing HAM6 images without artifacts exist since decades, and you can achieve results like these:

[ Show youtube player ]

The difference in size is inappreciable.

And I just meant for static screens or minimal movements, but HAM is fast enough to be used even for video (with better results than this example):

[ Show youtube player ]

And in game (even fps):

[ Show youtube player ]

If you don't wanna use it is ok and I respect it, just wanted to suggest you cause I've seen you are ambitious about the project, but the static screens don't seem to have quite the same level as the rest.

[tomcat666]

Originally Posted by x-vision

Programs for producing HAM6 images without artifacts exist since decades, and you can achieve results like these:

Do you have the ADF of this slideshow ? It does look amazing for ECS HAM6 mode...

[d4rk3lf]

Originally Posted by 10shu

Thank you.

Just Wow!
Love the foreshortening you did, and also love the mcgeezer tests with parallax.
Great idea, and amazing execution.

How many colors on the guy? 16 or 32?
Either way, the gradients you pulled off (for shadows and lights), the overall lighting, the pose.. I love everything!

I can only imagine if this was released in the early '90's.
You'd be definitely mentioned in all Amiga related magazines on the world, and many would use this as a front page art.

[x-vision]

Originally Posted by tomcat666

Do you have the ADF of this slideshow ? It does look amazing for ECS HAM6 mode...

This one seems to be from the creators of Metro Siege, I don't know if they published it but you can ask them.

But these two seem quite good also

http://mrsebe.bplaced.net/blog/wordpress/?page_id=374

https://github.com/alpine9000/amiga_..._ham/README.md

And you can find good info here :P

https://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=101282

[roondar]

Originally Posted by x-vision

The difference in size is inappreciable.

Six bitplane bitmaps/blitter objects are 20% larger than 5 bitplane ones. Which is quite a lot for A500 games, where Chip Memory size is one of the biggest system bottlenecks. You'd be surprised how little memory you have left once you start playing around with large screens using many bitplanes

And I just meant for static screens or minimal movements, but HAM is fast enough to be used even for video (with better results than this example):

Absolutely, HAM-6 can be used for video to great effect (if you have a HDD and/or plenty of RAM) or minor movement, but it should be noted that using 6 bitplanes (as in HAM or EHB) slows down the system considerably. For reference, here are some rough numbers (assuming simple square 32x32 objects for blitting, no smart tricks like McGeezer is using to get better results)

		320x256x5	vs	320x256x6
Total DMA	71050			71050
Refresh/audio	2304			2304
Bitplane DMA	25600			30720
--------------------------------------------------
DMA free	43146 (60,7%)		38026 (53,5%)
Difference: 7,2%

Blitting cost
32x32x5		vs	32x32x6
2880			3456 (120%)

Bob capacity (theoretical):
14,9		vs	11,0 (73,8%)

As you can see, going from 5 bitplanes to HAM loses you quite some performance. This might be an issue for this effect in HAM, because the object is already too big to be blit in one go is using 5 bitplanes. McGeezers current method to get the effect to fit in the available raster time won't work in HAM (Sprites can't be rendered as HAM objects, they always max out at 16 colours, so large parts of the guy are limited to that amount of colours as is).

Not saying it absolutely can't be done (some of the other methods mentioned might still work), but my gut feeling says it's asking a lot from the Blitter to manage this in HAM.

If you don't wanna use it is ok and I respect it, just wanted to suggest you cause I've seen you are ambitious about the project, but the static screens don't seem to have quite the same level as the rest.

Equally, I'm merely trying to give some context to your point, because not everybody might know these things

Personally, I think the title sequence is pretty neat as is though, the hand moving separately is a nice touch. I can almost hear the arcade-like sound when pressing the 'start' button

[10shu]

Also guys remember the part where i ve said i ve reworked the title screen. There more that what you have seen so far.

[Mixel]

@X-vision Those face images mostly look good through very smart dithering during the HAM conversion, which is a postprocess thing done to images created elsewhere from an artist's POV (photos, 3d renders etc), kind of the opposite of carefully executed pixel art, which looks the same everywhere (if planned correctly) and needs no damaging conversion. Nobody wants to do pixel art in HAM, as ham is a horrorshow of chromatic aberration and artifacts even while you're drawing it.. HAM really only ideally suits certain types of image - none of those portraits even have background detail for example.

Also I'm certain that slideshow example is HAM interlaced. Look at the height of the pixels in Alexandria Daddario's eyeliner, it's much less than 1px. That's not Low res.

You brought up the same "why not HAM?" thing for DREAD.. HAM kinda sucks (for most things), that's why!

If you were drawing in a detailed low res way like 10shu does (in Photoshop?) but with loads more colours then converted it into HAM.. It'd mess it up. HAM doesn't make most graphics better at all.

Originally Posted by 10shu

Also guys remember the part where i ve said i ve reworked the title screen. There more that what you have seen so far.

Even if you hadn't, it looked good and infitting for an arcade-like start screen. Really looking forward to what you've done.

[roondar]

Originally Posted by 10shu

Also guys remember the part where i ve said i ve reworked the title screen. There more that what you have seen so far.

Just to be 100% on this: I already love the GFX for the title screen (and in game!) as is. Looking forward to seeing the rework

Originally Posted by Mixel

You brought up the same "why not HAM?" thing for DREAD.. HAM kinda sucks (for most things), that's why!

If you were drawing in a detailed low res way like 10shu does (in Photoshop?) but with loads more colours then converted it into HAM.. It'd mess it up. HAM doesn't make most graphics better at all.

Yup, HAM is not nice to use. It's slow, memory hungry and hard to use well. It's almost (but not quite - see Pioneer Plague) useless for games.

As for more colours = better, I'm not so sure this is true. I've seen some extremely cool 16 colour stuff that looked awesome precisely because it didn't use thousands of colours. Sometimes, art gets more unique or more 'alive' when it's purposefully limited in some way. Limiting colours is one of those ways, IMHO.

[chadderack]

Originally Posted by roondar

As for more colours = better, I'm not so sure this is true. I've seen some extremely cool 16 colour stuff that looked awesome precisely because it didn't use thousands of colours. Sometimes, art gets more unique or more 'alive' when it's purposefully limited in some way. Limiting colours is one of those ways, IMHO.

Agreed. Risk going OT, but "more is better"/"3D is better"/"less jaggies are better" ideas really have nothing to do with the quality of gameplay. Personally I believe that the overall hard push (by either the game industry or "gamers") in the late 80s/early 90s for more and more "realism" in games was a bad thing. Cartoon-like, 2D sprites are the bomb

[mcgeezer]

A bit more on the title screen.

I'm pretty happy with it now... but I just need to optimise the fade in routine... too many muls in the interpolate routine I have.

[ Show youtube player ]

Graeme

[Neil79]

[Tigerskunk]

Wow...

[grond]

That looks great!

[manossg]

Amazing!

[nelsn68k]

I like the graphic style.