Would the Amiga be able to handle Angry Birds?

Steve · 05 January 2013, 23:42

Just got thinking about this as I was bored. Would the Amiga have been able to handle a physics-based game like Angry Birds? Does it have the horse-power to calculate all the different dynamics in a game like Angry Birds? Maybe this is why we didn't see much in the way of 2D physics engines on the Amiga.

s2325 · 05 January 2013, 23:52

I think it's possible to make some simple Angry Birds style game with first person view with Vaxine engine: [ Show youtube player ]

Steve · 06 January 2013, 00:04

No I mean 2D physics engine. I think the game for the Amiga which has one of the best developed 2D physics engines is Exile which makes good use of gravity and inertia, wind etc. Here is a funny video by some guy called Jim.

[ Show youtube player ]

Its still not a patch on the Angry Birds type of physics engine. Is the Amiga just not up to it?

robinsonb5 · 06 January 2013, 00:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

Maybe this is why we didn't see much in the way of 2D physics engines on the Amiga.

We saw plenty of 2D physics engines on the Amiga...

http://hol.abime.net/1054
http://hol.abime.net/1055
http://hol.abime.net/1059
http://hol.abime.net/1062
http://hol.abime.net/1972

(And Vaxine's engine gets into some quite complex stuff once the blobs start joining up.)

Steve · 06 January 2013, 01:51

No you don't quite get it. Those games use basic newtonian physics. What I am talking about is basic 'rigid body' physics like in Angry Birds. For example in Angry Birds the birds themselves are able to interact with their surroundings, knocking over boxes etc and generally interacting with the scenery and being able to make other objects in the game move in a physically realistic manner. This is what a rigid-body physics engine is. Not a ball bouncing around the screen. Really all the pinball games are doing is calculating gravity and velocity with collision detection. There is no real rigid-body physics engine going on there. I guess those kinds of physics (as used in Angry Birds) are a bit beyond the Amiga.

lordofchaos · 06 January 2013, 02:04

Hmm, perhaps with a 68060 and a wire frame 3D physics engine? Might just be on the edge of plausibility....Using the 3D in a 2D manner of course.

lesta_smsc · 06 January 2013, 02:04

Vaxine did really well with the 3D objects, particularly with how smooth the gameplay was!

lordofchaos · 06 January 2013, 02:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by lesta_smsc

Vaxine did really well with the 3D objects, particularly with how smooth the gameplay was!

Yeah not bad for a meager 7.15909 Mhz

Although proberly a lot of blit action being used too.

thomas · 06 January 2013, 02:39

The most time consuming part of an Amiga game is drawing the graphics. Calculating the object's speeds and positions is a minor task, if you know the formulas.

s2325 · 06 January 2013, 03:36

So maybe Worms engine is enough to make Angry Birds on Amiga.

NovaCoder · 06 January 2013, 05:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

Just got thinking about this as I was bored. Would the Amiga have been able to handle a physics-based game like Angry Birds? Does it have the horse-power to calculate all the different dynamics in a game like Angry Birds? Maybe this is why we didn't see much in the way of 2D physics engines on the Amiga.

I think it would really struggle (even on an 060), it may look simple but that physics Engine in Angry Birds are actually quite sophisticated.

Lord Aga · 06 January 2013, 11:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by s2325

So maybe Worms engine is enough to make Angry Birds on Amiga.

Worms were the first thing that came to my mind. If they could work on a bog standard A500, then surely a more sophisticated game could work on a beefed up A1200.

Mrs Beanbag · 06 January 2013, 13:00

Pinball physics is trivial, because there is only one moving object. Maybe 3 or 4 if there is a multiball mode but then they rarely interact with each other. Archer McClean's Pool/Snooker are better physics examples because there are many things moving at once and interacting with each other.

I haven't played Angry Birds but after watching a video it appears there are only two basic shapes: circles and rectangles. Individually these shouldn't pose a problem, but the complexity increases exponentially with the number of objects, and there seem to be quite a lot of objects moving at once. Perhaps a similar sort of game, but with simpler levels, could be possible.

DDNI · 06 January 2013, 13:57

Part of the challenge in Angry Birds is the fidelity of the gameplay. I doubt if the low resolution of native Amiga graphics could allowed for such depth.

lesta_smsc · 06 January 2013, 14:05

Graphics was never an issue... worms graphics is more than adequate for example. I think the worms engine could certainly provide the answers - it has the use of physics based on items being 'thrown' over but also the isolated distructive nature but how it would progress if it were to contact other 'sprites'.

Steve · 06 January 2013, 14:11

Interesting. I think 100% for sure an FPU would be required, as a decent physics engine requires the use of floating point math. So a stock A1200 wouldn't be able to run the game but maybe an 060 based A1200 with FPU. It just goes to show how times have changed and the power that is now encased in our little mobie phones.

Mrs Beanbag · 06 January 2013, 14:22

Worms engine is very simple by comparison. No rotation and the physics is certainly not very accurate, as solid as it feels when playing. Again, interactions between objects are the exception rather than the rule; interactions happen "at an instant", mostly objects are flying through free space, which is relatively trivial. Objects do not balance on top of each other. The terrain is essentially static. On Angry Birds the scenery is almost entirely composed out of moving objects in constant interactions with each other. This is a completely different kettle of fish. Do-able on a small scale, I suspect. I wouldn't try to write a clone of Angry Birds but a "physics game" along similar lines could work.

But the resolution of the graphics need not have any impact on the game play. I really do not understand this objection. Objects can be moved behind the scenes at any resolution, and I don't see anything in Angry Birds that relies in especially fine details, on the order of an Amiga's low-res pixel.

Mrs Beanbag · 06 January 2013, 14:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

Interesting. I think 100% for sure an FPU would be required, as a decent physics engine requires the use of floating point math.

It really doesn't, for a game. Fixed point is quite sufficient. Who would notice an inaccuracy of one part in 4096, say? Or 256?

Steve · 06 January 2013, 14:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

It really doesn't, for a game. Fixed point is quite sufficient. Who would notice an inaccuracy of one part in 4096, say? Or 256?

I mean if you want it to be as accurate as Angry Birds which certainly uses floating point math as that is just as quick (if not quicker) on modern mobile phones than fixed point math.

Mrs Beanbag · 06 January 2013, 14:34

Yes but the problem is not to make Angry Birds on a modern mobile phone; it is to make a physics-based game like Angry Birds on the Amiga. The fact is there is no need for it to be so accurate, so why fret over it?

05 January 2013, 23:42	#1
Steve I Identify as an Ewok Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: North Lincolnshire Age: 44 Posts: 2,355	Would the Amiga be able to handle Angry Birds? Just got thinking about this as I was bored. Would the Amiga have been able to handle a physics-based game like Angry Birds? Does it have the horse-power to calculate all the different dynamics in a game like Angry Birds? Maybe this is why we didn't see much in the way of 2D physics engines on the Amiga.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How do you guys handle CommodoreUSA threads please?	Pyromania	project.EAB	9	17 February 2011 02:25
Wanted: File Launcher that can handle thousands of entries	alkis21	request.Apps	27	30 May 2010 13:09
Angry Video Game Nerd again	Retro-Nerd	Retrogaming General Discussion	0	21 February 2008 03:59
Installing Originals - Birds of Prey, Jungle Strike & Ishar2	vroom6sri	support.Games	12	04 November 2005 09:13
Birds N' Bees	Twistin'Ghost	Retrogaming General Discussion	11	10 December 2001 23:33

05 January 2013, 23:52	#2
s2325 Zone Friend Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Gargore Age: 43 Posts: 17,789	I think it's possible to make some simple Angry Birds style game with first person view with Vaxine engine: [ Show youtube player ]

06 January 2013, 00:04	#3
Steve I Identify as an Ewok Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: North Lincolnshire Age: 44 Posts: 2,355	No I mean 2D physics engine. I think the game for the Amiga which has one of the best developed 2D physics engines is Exile which makes good use of gravity and inertia, wind etc. Here is a funny video by some guy called Jim. [ Show youtube player ] Its still not a patch on the Angry Birds type of physics engine. Is the Amiga just not up to it?

06 January 2013, 01:51	#5
Steve I Identify as an Ewok Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: North Lincolnshire Age: 44 Posts: 2,355	No you don't quite get it. Those games use basic newtonian physics. What I am talking about is basic 'rigid body' physics like in Angry Birds. For example in Angry Birds the birds themselves are able to interact with their surroundings, knocking over boxes etc and generally interacting with the scenery and being able to make other objects in the game move in a physically realistic manner. This is what a rigid-body physics engine is. Not a ball bouncing around the screen. Really all the pinball games are doing is calculating gravity and velocity with collision detection. There is no real rigid-body physics engine going on there. I guess those kinds of physics (as used in Angry Birds) are a bit beyond the Amiga.

06 January 2013, 02:04	#6
lordofchaos TinkerTailorContentMaker Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Bedfordshire Age: 45 Posts: 1,203	Hmm, perhaps with a 68060 and a wire frame 3D physics engine? Might just be on the edge of plausibility....Using the 3D in a 2D manner of course.

06 January 2013, 02:04	#7
lesta_smsc Registered User Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 3,092	Vaxine did really well with the 3D objects, particularly with how smooth the gameplay was!

06 January 2013, 02:39	#9
thomas Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Germany Posts: 6,892	The most time consuming part of an Amiga game is drawing the graphics. Calculating the object's speeds and positions is a minor task, if you know the formulas.

06 January 2013, 03:36	#10
s2325 Zone Friend Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Gargore Age: 43 Posts: 17,789	So maybe Worms engine is enough to make Angry Birds on Amiga.

06 January 2013, 13:00	#13
Mrs Beanbag Glastonbridge Software Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Edinburgh/Scotland Posts: 2,242	Pinball physics is trivial, because there is only one moving object. Maybe 3 or 4 if there is a multiball mode but then they rarely interact with each other. Archer McClean's Pool/Snooker are better physics examples because there are many things moving at once and interacting with each other. I haven't played Angry Birds but after watching a video it appears there are only two basic shapes: circles and rectangles. Individually these shouldn't pose a problem, but the complexity increases exponentially with the number of objects, and there seem to be quite a lot of objects moving at once. Perhaps a similar sort of game, but with simpler levels, could be possible.

06 January 2013, 13:57	#14
DDNI Targ Explorer Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Northern Ireland Posts: 5,409	Part of the challenge in Angry Birds is the fidelity of the gameplay. I doubt if the low resolution of native Amiga graphics could allowed for such depth.

06 January 2013, 14:05	#15
lesta_smsc Registered User Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 3,092	Graphics was never an issue... worms graphics is more than adequate for example. I think the worms engine could certainly provide the answers - it has the use of physics based on items being 'thrown' over but also the isolated distructive nature but how it would progress if it were to contact other 'sprites'.

06 January 2013, 14:11	#16
Steve I Identify as an Ewok Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: North Lincolnshire Age: 44 Posts: 2,355	Interesting. I think 100% for sure an FPU would be required, as a decent physics engine requires the use of floating point math. So a stock A1200 wouldn't be able to run the game but maybe an 060 based A1200 with FPU. It just goes to show how times have changed and the power that is now encased in our little mobie phones.

06 January 2013, 14:22	#17
Mrs Beanbag Glastonbridge Software Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Edinburgh/Scotland Posts: 2,242	Worms engine is very simple by comparison. No rotation and the physics is certainly not very accurate, as solid as it feels when playing. Again, interactions between objects are the exception rather than the rule; interactions happen "at an instant", mostly objects are flying through free space, which is relatively trivial. Objects do not balance on top of each other. The terrain is essentially static. On Angry Birds the scenery is almost entirely composed out of moving objects in constant interactions with each other. This is a completely different kettle of fish. Do-able on a small scale, I suspect. I wouldn't try to write a clone of Angry Birds but a "physics game" along similar lines could work. But the resolution of the graphics need not have any impact on the game play. I really do not understand this objection. Objects can be moved behind the scenes at any resolution, and I don't see anything in Angry Birds that relies in especially fine details, on the order of an Amiga's low-res pixel.

06 January 2013, 14:34	#20
Mrs Beanbag Glastonbridge Software Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Edinburgh/Scotland Posts: 2,242	Yes but the problem is not to make Angry Birds on a modern mobile phone; it is to make a physics-based game like Angry Birds on the Amiga. The fact is there is no need for it to be so accurate, so why fret over it?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)