Hardware pushed to the limits according to Sega-16 members

[Kamahl]

Assuming the player is a sprite and hence not affected by scrolling: do everything at 25FPS, but have the first tick of each frame being halfway between the previous and next frames? Although it'll still probably not look great when you're standing in place an enemies move around at half framerate.

Yeah something like that would be my idea, check where the player is going and animate the enemies at 25 fps taking that into account. The game also has that Aladdin style weird scrolling where the camera pans the other way like crazy when you change directions, that just makes it worse.

When you're standing still it would be a standard 25fps game but since it doesn't scroll it doesn't hurt the eyes too much.

EDIT: This game is looking better and better, shame it only runs on PAL C64s (NTSC needs the RAM expansion).


No other game looks this good on the machine, not even mayhem in monsterland.

[segarule]

think you misunderstand of what I posted there. 16K vram seems like quite a bit, but realize that SMS graphics are 4bit. This is much higher than the NES and any 8bit home computer. So take the NES for example; is has 8k of vram for sprites and tile cells. The graphic format is 2bit though. That means you have total of 512 usable 8x8 cells at your disposal on a stock machine. Likewise, the SMS has 16k of vram but since the sprite/tile cells are 4bit they take up twice the space as 2bit tiles. That would normally be reduce it back down to the same 512 8x8 cells, but you also need tilemaps and sprite attribute tables in that same vram space. So it's only 448 cells. Less than the NES. On top of that, the NES has hardware sprite flipping meaning it doesn't have to waste either cpu bandwidth updating a flipped version of the sprite and it doesn't waste vram by having to store flipped versions of enemy sprites. The NES can also change its vram banks mid screen without problem, extended the character set further.

Once more like i said when you put all technical info i like it. I understood better your explanation. But Nes with 8k of vram in cartridge, right? Because what i know is 2 k.

So 16k looks better at first, but once you realize that the better graphic bit depth takes up double the space, among other limitations, it's not really an advantage at all. Take for example the Genesis, SNES, and PCE. All have 4bit graphics just like the SMS, but all have 64k of vram. And it's needed if you're going to do stuff like double buffering; which means updating frames of animation across multiple frames without screen tearing. Not just for sprites or BG tiles, but certain tilemap effects to (large changes to the tilemap data) - for double buffering.

I think unfair to compare SMS with those consoles. 16 bits are in other level taking in count what yourself said. All 3 consoles had 64 k of vram. SMS had vram memory compatible with back days. Sega not imagined that chips would be cheaper and did all in console.

Small tilemap: The SMS tilemap is just 8 pixels smaller in width than the screen display. Certain horizontal mid screen scroll effects are limited by this width (by comparison, NES has 512px wide tilemap feature). For horizontal scrolling, you have to do the tilemap update in one vblank - it can't be split across two or more frames. Since there's no DMA to update vram quickly, and it can eat into the max vblank vram update queue. But I was also referring more to the vertical height. The SMS has no mid screen Y scroll changes. Which is extremely odd. This means certain special effects are off limits to the SMS (Y warping effects, some transparency tilemap type effects, etc). Then again, interrupt driven Y warping and such might be too taxing on the processor anyway for most games. I'd rather they let that up to the programmer to decide, though.

What console! with all these weaknesses and yet did 85 to 90% of versions better than Nes (and few than PCE). See Dracula? The same team of developers and the SMS is better. But between the 2 consoles other games have small animations. For example, micromachines in Nes the characters are animated and in SMS not. It is relevant for the game while that in Addams family the Nes had some animation more but in overall the SMS is better.

Those are its technical weaknesses. That's not an opinion. That's a fact. Whether those are good or bad weaknesses to have, would be a matter of opinion. I couldn't say one way or another without context of what is being done on the SMS, but that's no different than any other console. Some of those weaknesses might not even come into play for certain game designs.

I will prove that is an opinion.

SMS had 4bit graphics, 16 k vram, 448 cells, small tilemap - fact;
Nes had 2bit graphics 8k vram, 512 cell, DMA - fact;
You comparing Nes with SMS is your opinion. Why not compare with Msx, Msx2 or Atari 7800? You did the choice.
And you only pointed 2bit advantage in memory. You dont pointed that SMS had 448 cells but 4bit graphics. You dont pointed the weakness "per si" but comparing with one console of your preference.

[tomaitheous]

I will prove that is an opinion.

SMS had 4bit graphics, 16 k vram, 448 cells, small tilemap - fact;
Nes had 2bit graphics 8k vram, 512 cell, DMA - fact;
You comparing Nes with SMS is your opinion. Why not compare with Msx, Msx2 or Atari 7800? You did the choice.
And you only pointed 2bit advantage in memory. You dont pointed that SMS had 448 cells but 4bit graphics. You dont pointed the weakness "per si" but comparing with one console of your preference.

Look, I'm having a hard time understanding you. I thought I made myself pretty clear. Every system has weaknesses. Where those weaknesses matter for game design, is totally relevant to context of said game. Just because you don't like that I pointed them out as weaknesses, doesn't mean they aren't. Do you think not having Y tilemap repositioning mid screen is a strength? Do you think not having more tile/cell memory for graphics than the NES is capable of.. is a strength? Do you think not having a DMA to handle the extra bandwidth of 4bit graphics over 2bit graphics is a strength??? Because I don't. I see a system with upgraded color support, but nothing else that goes along with to match it (memory, bandwidth, etc).

Why would I compare it to the MSX!? That system is crippled-like (not a whole lot better than a ZX speccy). The MSX2 has some nice features, but it's also gimped in a lot of areas. These are also COMPUTERS. I didn't compare any computers to the SMS or NES. They are different type of machines.

The only thing closest to the SMS, in the console market for that era, is the NES. So yes, it's very fair to compare them. And considering the SMS came out afterwards, that should have game it an advantage. The SMS and NES, not only being console system in the same market, but also have very-very-very simular hardware designs. The 7800 is a breed of its own and nothing like these systems (and IMO the 7800 is a dud).

Also, I did point out that the SMS has 4bit graphics. I even stated this is the reason why the 16k memory isn't as large as it first appears, because the better graphics take up twice the space. Matter of fact, I didn't think I needed to even expand on the 4bit graphics of the SMS because anyone whose played through the library knows that it can produce some really color/beautiful graphics for the time. I don't really know what more you want of me? Do you want me to say the SMS is the king and nothing can touch it??? I give up..

[segarule]

Look, I'm having a hard time understanding you. I thought I made myself pretty clear. Every system has weaknesses. Where those weaknesses matter for game design, is totally relevant to context of said game. Just because you don't like that I pointed them out as weaknesses, doesn't mean they aren't. Do you think not having Y tilemap repositioning mid screen is a strength? Do you think not having more tile/cell memory for graphics than the NES is capable of.. is a strength? Do you think not having a DMA to handle the extra bandwidth of 4bit graphics over 2bit graphics is a strength???

Don´t get upset. Your questions: 1- No;2-No;3-No. I understood and thanks for all info. Im not denying the SMS weaknesses.

Why would I compare it to the MSX!? That system is crippled-like (not a whole lot better than a ZX speccy). The MSX2 has some nice features, but it's also gimped in a lot of areas. These are also COMPUTERS. I didn't compare any computers to the SMS or NES. They are different type of machines.

Because we dont are comparing markets but system weaknesses, with VDPs, and games.

The only thing closest to the SMS, in the console market for that era, is the NES. So yes, it's very fair to compare them. And considering the SMS came out afterwards, that should have game it an advantage. The SMS and NES, not only being console system in the same market, but also have very-very-very simular hardware designs. The 7800 is a breed of its own and nothing like these systems (and IMO the 7800 is a dud).

But noboby asked to you to compare consoles based in console market. And i dont said that compare them would be unfair (only with Gen, SNES, PCE). Now is strange you say to me that couldnt compare SMS to COMPUTERS:

Toki on the Amiga is pretty impressive. More impressive than any of those "copper" effect games. Here's a game on the Amiga, with dual scrolling layers, that has none of the typical tell tale signs of Amiga limitations. No 7 colors shared between enemies and background look, no copper to cover it up with "splash" color distractions, etc. It really looks something straight off the Genesis. The game has music and sound fx too.

And

But rarely do I ever see a Genesis upper or mid level tier game equivalent on the Amiga. Ports from Amiga games to the Genesis, like Gods or Shadow of the Best games, don't count because they were already Amiga games. Shadow of the Beast series is one of those Amiga games where they stretch the color usage too thin; enemies with monocolor shades (3?). The main character in the Amiga port of SotB2 looks like a 3 color NES sprite - there's an enemy whose sword and clothes are the same colors as his flesh.

You see? You compared Amiga (COMPUTER) with Genesis (console). Moreover, TMS9918, TMS9918a, TMS9938 and sega TMS9918 are more easy in compare. For example, is interesting compare Aleste (msx) with Aleste (sms).

Also, I did point out that the SMS has 4bit graphics. I even stated this is the reason why the 16k memory isn't as large as it first appears, because the better graphics take up twice the space. Matter of fact, I didn't think I needed to even expand on the 4bit graphics of the SMS because anyone whose played through the library knows that it can produce some really color/beautiful graphics for the time. I don't really know what more you want of me? Do you want me to say the SMS is the king and nothing can touch it??? I give up..

1 - You said that SMS had few vram;
2- I was thinking that not;
3- you explained better why and i understood and agree
4 - I only think that 16k is enough despite few space to negociate with 4bit graphics
5- Nes comparisons are subjectives (in terms of system choice and no technical specs)
6 - IMO with those weaknesses the SMS made good games and better than most part that respectives nes versions (opinion) but i dont want that you say "nothing can touch it"

[zetastrike]

Do you think the Amiga might have been better utilized by devs had the ST not existed? I've been watching a lot of Amiga/ST videos lately and it's cringe worthy how much the ST held it back. A lot of that is the fault of the super cheapo mentality of the Euro games industry. Even ignoring the lack of scrolling or parallax or good color use in a lot of games, just the continued use of 1 button joysticks makes me facepalm. It was such a cool piece of hardware utterly wasted on an industry that was held together by rubber bands and paper clips.

[Barone]

Do you think the Amiga might have been better utilized by devs had the ST not existed? I've been watching a lot of Amiga/ST videos lately and it's cringe worthy how much the ST held it back. A lot of that is the fault of the super cheapo mentality of the Euro games industry. Even ignoring the lack of scrolling or parallax or good color use in a lot of games, just the continued use of 1 button joysticks makes me facepalm. It was such a cool piece of hardware utterly wasted on an industry that was held together by rubber bands and paper clips.

I think the cheapo ST-to-Amiga ports are more a consequence than the cause of anything.

Commodore's business model for the Amiga platform is the real cause IMO. The license fees were much lower than the ones asked by Sega and especially Nintendo AFAIK (keep in mind the much lower number of units sold worldwide when compared to NES, SNES, Mega Drive, etc.), so you have that double-edged sword of providing an entrance level that is reachable even by very small companies, with very limited budget. That resulted in a HUGE library with lots of innovative ideas but it also leaves a huge door open for low-quality releases and quick dirty ports.
Had the Atari ST not existed (or not co-existed), the companies responsible for those ports you're referring to would probably: 1) Find another way to split their costs, maybe borrowing code from an even weaker platform than the Atari ST; 2) Would produce even worse games given they would probably have an even lower budget for those games; 3) Would simply not develop for the Amiga.

OTOH, had Commodore set a decent development studio by themselves or some kind of strong 2nd party partnership, they could eventually drive up the overall quality of the library.

To some extent, that's what companies such as Psygnosis, Core Design and Team17 did for the Amiga as a platform, they raised the bar a little bit. Hadn't those companies existed or ever developed for the Amiga and I think we would have far less memorable Amiga games to talk about.

[gamevet]

I think the cheapo ST-to-Amiga ports are more a consequence than the cause of anything.

Commodore's business model for the Amiga platform is the real cause IMO. The license fees were much lower than the ones asked by Sega and especially Nintendo AFAIK (keep in mind the much lower number of units sold worldwide when compared to NES, SNES, Mega Drive, etc.), so you have that double-edged sword of providing an entrance level that is reachable even by very small companies, with very limited budget. That resulted in a HUGE library with lots of innovative ideas but it also leaves a huge door open for low-quality releases and quick dirty ports.
Had the Atari ST not existed (or not co-existed), the companies responsible for those ports you're referring to would probably: 1) Find another way to split their costs, maybe borrowing code from an even weaker platform than the Atari ST; 2) Would produce even worse games given they would probably have an even lower budget for those games; 3) Would simply not develop for the Amiga.

OTOH, had Commodore set a decent development studio by themselves or some kind of strong 2nd party partnership, they could eventually drive up the overall quality of the library.

To some extent, that's what companies such as Psygnosis, Core Design and Team17 did for the Amiga as a platform, they raised the bar a little bit. Hadn't those companies existed or ever developed for the Amiga and I think we would have far less memorable Amiga games to talk about.

The bulk of Amiga software support came from Europe though. The ST was the lead platform for a couple of years, until Commodore released the more affordable A500. The original Turrican was pretty much a straight port of the ST game, with Amiga sound added to it. It was pretty much like early European releases for the C-64, that clearly showed that they were ports of Spectrum games over to the hardware.

Are you sure about licensing fees for the Amiga? I thought it was pretty much like the C-64 and the many other 8-bit computers of the day. Those computers had a lot of software, because there wasn't any kind of licensing fee in place, unless they released a title based upon a movie or established gaming franchise. They certainly didn't have to pay Commodore for use of built in software tools like Microsoft's Direct-X for the PC.

[Barone]

Are you sure about licensing fees for the Amiga?

No, I'm not. All I remember was Amiga forums comments from former developers comparing the costs to release a game to the Mega Drive or Mega CD to Amiga or CD32.
I remember the costs were much lower but if there were no license fees on the Amiga side, that would make all the sense to me.

[Sik]

A lot of that is the fault of the super cheapo mentality of the Euro games industry.

In the case of ports it was also the fault of publishers. It was very common for a publisher approach a dev to port their game, but then give them absolutely no access to anything that could be useful: no source code, no graphics, nothing. On a tight deadline, at that. If you see graphics being identical to the original (aside from maybe adapting the colors), chances are the developer got a cabinet and dumped the ROMs just to get the graphics.

Sega was specially guilty of doing this shit.

[Kamahl]

Even when porting ST games, adding hardware scrolling (for the games that did push scrolling) and replacing the drawing routines with blitter calls couldn't have been more than a week of work for a single dev. Then you have games like the Addams Family or Lost Vikings where they tried adding parallax to the Amiga version, gave up half way, and didn't even bother putting a static background instead (going for a 'gorgeous' all black look instead). Not even a copper gradient!

The Amiga was treated like crap by most devs and by commodore itself. It's really sad.

[MasterGenesis]

You can't say hardware pushed to it's limits without mentioning Jungle Hunt for the Atari 2600 with it's parallax-esque scrolling.

[segarule]

I know this game! i did play it.

In sound territory, the flash could be a example of hardware pushed to limits?

[Black_Tiger]

You can't say hardware pushed to it's limits without mentioning Jungle Hunt for the Atari 2600 with it's parallax-esque scrolling.

There was actually a lot of parallax in games during that generation. Which makes the whole "fake parallax" nonsense about the TG-16/PCE all the more laughable.

[MasterGenesis]

There was actually a lot of parallax in games during that generation. Which makes the whole "fake parallax" nonsense about the TG-16/PCE all the more laughable.

That's interesting, I wonder what other games have it from back in the day.

[TrekkiesUnite118]

I will prove that is an opinion.

SMS had 4bit graphics, 16 k vram, 448 cells, small tilemap - fact;
Nes had 2bit graphics 8k vram, 512 cell, DMA - fact;
You comparing Nes with SMS is your opinion. Why not compare with Msx, Msx2 or Atari 7800? You did the choice.
And you only pointed 2bit advantage in memory. You dont pointed that SMS had 448 cells but 4bit graphics. You dont pointed the weakness "per si" but comparing with one console of your preference.

This post gave me sheath flashbacks...