Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
6052 members 
Amiga Q&A /  Free for All /  Emulation /  Gaming / (Latest Posts)
Login

Nickname

Password

Lost Password?

Don't have an account yet?
Register now!

Support Amigaworld.net
Your support is needed and is appreciated as Amigaworld.net is primarily dependent upon the support of its users.
Donate

Menu
Main sections
Home
Features
News
Forums
Classifieds
Links
Downloads
Extras
OS4 Zone
IRC Network
AmigaWorld Radio
Newsfeed
Top Members
Amiga Dealers
Information
About Us
FAQs
Advertise
Polls
Terms of Service
Search

IRC Channel
Server: irc.amigaworld.net
Ports: 1024,5555, 6665-6669
SSL port: 6697
Channel: #Amigaworld
Channel Policy and Guidelines

Who's Online
73 crawler(s) on-line.
 26 guest(s) on-line.
 0 member(s) on-line.



You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 zipper:  23 mins ago
 DiscreetFX:  37 mins ago
 Kronos:  47 mins ago
 clint:  47 mins ago
 pixie:  50 mins ago
 Karlos:  56 mins ago
 Futaura:  1 hr 27 mins ago
 ppcamiga1:  2 hrs 6 mins ago
 agami:  2 hrs 45 mins ago
 Maijestro:  2 hrs 49 mins ago

/  Forum Index
   /  Amiga General Chat
      /  How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Register To Post

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 Next Page )
Poll : How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
10p Excellent (Best at 2D/3D, colors, and resolution, frame rate etc.)
5p Good / better than most computer.
0p Barely hanging in there.
-5p Below average / slow but usable
-10p useless / horrible
 
PosterThread
MEGA_RJ_MICAL 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 30-Oct-2022 3:01:54
#501 ]
Super Member
Joined: 13-Dec-2019
Posts: 1200
From: AMIGAWORLD.NET WAS ORIGINALLY FOUNDED BY DAVID DOYLE

But did you know that

Quote:
Wayfarer, the most feature rich Web Browser that the Amiga has ever seen so far, is apparently closing in on its 4.0 release. It will be based on the recent WebKitGTK 2.36.3!


?

_________________
I HAVE ABS OF STEEL
--
CAN YOU SEE ME? CAN YOU HEAR ME? OK FOR WORK

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Massi 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 30-Oct-2022 5:16:48
#502 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 2-Feb-2011
Posts: 627
From: Rome, Italy

@Hammer

Agree, you don' t want to showcase Fighting Spirit as a tech demo of the AGA capabilities (to be on topic about AGA).

The main problem is that the game runs in "slow motion" and thus it is not playable nor fun.

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
cdimauro 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 30-Oct-2022 6:24:21
#503 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3104
From: Germany

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote:
@cdimauro

Quote:

This contradicts your previous statement about your preference for Elfmania, which has even much less dynamism...
Quote:

Fightin Spirit's game environment is dead and it was mocked by other SNES/Genesis gamers.

Which is a completely different thing. Why do you change the discussion? This is a logical fallacy.
Quote:
Fightin Spirit does NOT have SNES/Genesis-style parallax floor and parallax layers.

Guess what: I know it. And we already talked about it.
Quote:
From https://youtu.be/4Oi--uDSYIw?t=264
This Team 17's Body Blows Galactic (AGA) stage has a single background parallax layer.

And how many colors it used? Have you checked them or you only focuses on the parallex?
Quote:
https://youtu.be/4Oi--uDSYIw?t=777
Body Blows Galactic (AGA)'s game environment effort with some floor movement and floor mirror effects.

Which isn't floor parallax.
Quote:
Body Blows Galactic doesn't have dynamic game environment consistency when compared to Elfmania

Fightin Spirit doesn't have Elfmania's parallax floor and parallax layer effects.

Yes, and? They both don't have the colors of Fightin' Spirit and great number of animations and players effects.

As I've said, they have completely different goals and related engines.
Quote:
Quote:

And Fightin' Spirit is a balance between it and more colored graphics.

I wouldn't use Fightin Spirit as a technical demo

In fact it's not a technical demo.
Quote:
for the Amiga when debating against Sega Genesis SF2.

Who debated against Genesis' SF2? You. Not me.
Quote:
SNES SF2 has reduced player object size to budget for a dynamic game environment.

I've already said before that the SNES had a lower resolution (256 pixels horizontally).
Quote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31y_ScwUB6E
A500 with Fast RAM can run this SF2 tech demo with floor parallax and backwall parallax layer.

Stock A1200 can run the above SF2 tech demo with floor parallax and backwall parallax layer.

Already discussed about it.
Quote:
This SF2 tech demo runs very smooth on A500 with PiStorm.

PiStorm = a monster compared to the Amiga hardware.

Why didn't you tested it on WinUAE with your Ryzen?
Quote:
SNES/Genesis SF2 is the benchmark to be compared against NOT some less known Neo Geo game title.

First, who want to benchmark? Only you. And against consoles which are DESIGNED for games (many hardware sprites + different playfields).

Second, Neo Geo was very well known. And desired. It was the best console of that time.


@Massi

Quote:

Massi wrote:
@Hammer

Agree, you don' t want to showcase Fighting Spirit as a tech demo of the AGA capabilities (to be on topic about AGA).

In fact it's not a technical demo.
Quote:
The main problem is that the game runs in "slow motion" and thus it is not playable nor fun.

Again? I've already asked evidence and but you run away like a rabbit.

But you go back repeated the same mantra.

Repeating things don't make them true. Rather, it starts the Goebbles propaganda.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
cdimauro 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 30-Oct-2022 6:44:50
#504 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3104
From: Germany

@bhabbott

Quote:

bhabbott wrote:
@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote:

I'm not an hardware engineer...

Which wasn't required, since the implementation is simple. Trivial, at the hardware level.

Not a hardware engineer, yet you conclude that the implementation would be 'trivial'?

The fact that I'm not an hardware engineer doesn't mean that I completely out of hardware topics. This is elementary logic, Bruce.

As I've written before:
However this doesn't stop me to analyze technical facts and share my opinion, IF I realize that I could do it (which was this case).
See the highlighted part.

In fact: https://www.edaboard.com/threads/how-to-reverse-the-order-of-bits-in-vhdl.65136/

B(0 to 63) [less]= A(63 downto 0); // Replaced the minor symbol with "less" because of the forum which doesn't like this symbol.

This is the code required for a bit reversal operation. Change 63 to 15 and you've the mirror of a 16 bit word.

This works out of the box for Amiga sprites.

For the Blitter you need another (ONE) change when the hardware flipping is enabled for a channel (A or B): decrement the pointer instead of incrementing it, after having fetched a word from memory.

That's it. Sooooo much complicated, eh?
Quote:
Quote:
So, have you developed games?

One standard for you, another for me, eh?

No: see above.
Quote:
I worked on several games, but none that were released. This was because I code for fun and producing a commercial game is a lot of work.

Any information about such games?
Quote:
I also hacked a lot of games and looked at how they did the graphics. Of course this was on machines that didn't have hardware flipping.

Have you took a look at Fightin' Spirit?
Quote:
According to gaintbomb.com the first home computer to have hardware flipping was MSX2, introduced in 1985 (same year as the Amiga). However the V9938 technical reference manual doesn't say anything about this. The blitter may be able to reverse pixel order when copying in reverse. However it appears to only do rectangular block copies with no masking, so I guess this would have to be done by the CPU. The blitter is only 8 bit and often misses DMA slots so it is much slower than the Amiga's blitter, and the CPU to VDP interface is also only 8 bit with a bus speed of ~1MHz. In short, even if it does have true hardware flipping it was no competition to the Amiga.

The single, weak, implementation isn't a proof of the general statement. Again, it's elementary logic.

In fact, other systems implemented the hardware flipping in the correct and efficient way.
Quote:
So it seems that Commodore's engineers were not the only ones who weren't 'smart',

What's not clear to you about what I've reported before on Ron Nicholson?
Quote:
since the others apparently weren't able to implement this 'trivial' feature in their designs either.

See above on this: it IS trivial.

Even for a software version. But it's not efficient, of course (as we experimented on Fightin' Spirit before that I've introduce my trick).
Quote:
Quote:
OK, but this doesn't change the point: it's about what was better for developers. As I've already said above, you can talk with other game developers and ask their opinion about what we talked here.

Well sure, ask a developer if they would like this or that feature that might make their job a little easier and of course they will say yes.

The job isn't "a little" easier. And they don't say yes for everything because they are lazy.

Ask them what we discussed and ask their opinion related to the hardware limits of the time. This would give a fair feedback about the topic.
Quote:
Might be a different story if they had to choose between that and something else though.

Things aren't always mutually exclusive. And in this case the implementation was trivial and required just a bunch of logic: see above.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Massi 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 30-Oct-2022 7:06:54
#505 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 2-Feb-2011
Posts: 627
From: Rome, Italy

@cdimauro

To me Fighting Spirit doesn' t seem to run at 50 fps the A1200 version, based on my personal perception playing the game.
Thus the gameplay is not smooth. My feeling is that the use of the A1200 was just mediocre.

Proud I never purchased the original copy of the game.

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
cdimauro 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 30-Oct-2022 7:08:38
#506 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3104
From: Germany

@Massi

Quote:

Massi wrote:
@cdimauro

To me Fighting Spirit doesn' t seem to run at 50 fps the A1200 version, based on my personal perception playing the game.
Thus the gameplay is not smooth. My feeling is that the use of the A1200 was just mediocre.

YOUR feeling. Right. Excellent "proof"...
Quote:
Proud I never purchased the original copy of the game.

Who cares.

BTW, wants you that called me a troll? You're feeding me.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Massi 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 30-Oct-2022 7:18:49
#507 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 2-Feb-2011
Posts: 627
From: Rome, Italy

@cdimauro

Proud I have bought other games and not a single lira went to you.

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
pixie 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 30-Oct-2022 17:45:56
#508 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 10-Mar-2003
Posts: 2845
From: Figueira da Foz - Portugal

@Massi

Quote:

Massi wrote:
@Hammer

Agree, you don' t want to showcase Fighting Spirit as a tech demo of the AGA capabilities (to be on topic about AGA).

The main problem is that the game runs in "slow motion" and thus it is not playable nor fun.


I've seen an head to head cd32;against Fatal Fury of Neo Geo and wasn't that bad performance wise, given amiga limitations. Big sprites et all, perhaps art wise not as good, but Fatal Fury has a way bigger budget

_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
bhabbott 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 31-Oct-2022 3:36:53
#509 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 6-Jun-2018
Posts: 251
From: Aotearoa

Quote:

cdimauro wrote:

As I've written before:
However this doesn't stop me to analyze technical facts and share my opinion

Double-standard noted.

Quote:
In fact: https://www.edaboard.com/threads/how-to-reverse-the-order-of-bits-in-vhdl.65136/

[i]B(0 to 63) [less]= A(63 downto 0); // Replaced the minor symbol with "less" because of the forum which doesn't like this symbol.

This is the code required for a bit reversal operation. Change 63 to 15 and you've the mirror of a 16 bit word

This works out of the box for Amiga sprites.

For the Blitter you need another (ONE) change when the hardware flipping is enabled for a channel (A or B): decrement the pointer instead of incrementing it, after having fetched a word from memory.

That's it. Sooooo much complicated, eh?

Oh sure, the VHDL code for the core effect is trivial (who would have guessed?). Now show us how many transistors are needed to implement it in the Amiga chipset.

Quote:
Any information about such games?

What do you want - code, graphics, game design notes? It was 35-40 years ago and too many things have happened for me to remember the details. All my backups were stolen in 1991 so I have very little from before that. Since then I have had several 'spring cleans' and threw away most of my 'old junk' (AKA valuable retro computer stuff, sniff!).

Quote:
The single, weak, implementation isn't a proof of the general statement. Again, it's elementary logic.

Actually it's very relevant. You accuse Commodore's engineers of being 'not smart' for not putting flipping logic in the Amiga, but the only other contemporary home computer chip designer that did implemented it in a crude and inefficient way, even though Yamaha had an excellent reputation. It's almost like they didn't think it was a particularly important feature (not even enough to mention in the technical reference manual).

Quote:
The job isn't "a little" easier. And they don't say yes for everything because they are lazy.

It's actually barely easier at all. Drawing the graphics is a little easier for the artist - but you have to be careful not make the mirroring too obvious, and so have less freedom in the character design. A bit of memory is saved which may make game design and programming easier if space is tight - but space is always tight when you expand the game to fit it.

Quote:
Things aren't always mutually exclusive. And in this case the implementation was trivial and required just a bunch of logic: see above.

Trivial sure - in VHDL. But Jay Miner wasn't working with modern FPGAs with their synthesis and simulation tools. He had to create a working machine using discrete TTL logic ICs wire-wrapped on a dozen huge breadboards. This then had to be painstakingly converted to an ASIC transistor layout, drawn by hand to make photographic masks - a very long and involved process which could take months and wasn't proved until the chips were manufactured and put into the computer.

People today have it so easy with modern FPGAs and the tools used to produce logic for them. I have worked with GALs which are less sophisticated but still much easier than using discrete logic. But I prefer to design with standard logic chips where practicable because I like the physicality of it, as well as the challenge.

I had a huge collection of TTL logic IC's, but stupidly threw them away when I moved house 6 years ago. Now I am collecting ancient PC and Mac parts that nobody wants and harvesting the chips from them. Hoping to design some more interesting stuff for the Amiga that doesn't use any programmable logic, like we did 'back in the day'. With the current ongoing microchip shortage, this retro purism may come back into fashion!

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 31-Oct-2022 5:41:36
#510 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 4656
From: Australia

@pixie

Quote:

pixie wrote:
@Massi

Quote:

Massi wrote:
@Hammer

Agree, you don' t want to showcase Fighting Spirit as a tech demo of the AGA capabilities (to be on topic about AGA).

The main problem is that the game runs in "slow motion" and thus it is not playable nor fun.


I've seen an head to head cd32;against Fatal Fury of Neo Geo and wasn't that bad performance wise, given amiga limitations. Big sprites et all, perhaps art wise not as good, but Fatal Fury has a way bigger budget


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiCmlcqW8QA
Fatal Fury (Neo Geo) has a basic parallax layer.

Body Blows Galatic AGA's stage with a basic background parallax layer e.g. https://youtu.be/7w31qSYBh7I?t=271


Body Blows Galatic AGA's stage with foreground parallax layer and moving floor effects.
https://youtu.be/7w31qSYBh7I?t=905
Body Blows Galatic's gameworld effects are not consistent.

Fatal Fury is not CapCom 's SF2 caliber on the SNES.

As of March 1997, the Neo Geo and the Neo Geo CD combined had sold 980,000 units worldwide. LOL

SNES has crushed Neo Geo.







_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, TF1260, 68060 @ 63 Mhz, 128 MB)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi3a/Emu68)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
cdimauro 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 31-Oct-2022 5:46:51
#511 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3104
From: Germany

@Massi

Quote:

Massi wrote:
@cdimauro

Proud I have bought other games and not a single lira went to you.

Oh, little boy: have you consoled yourself your violated ago? Do you feel better now?


@pixie

Quote:

pixie wrote:
@Massi

Quote:

Massi wrote:
@Hammer

Agree, you don' t want to showcase Fighting Spirit as a tech demo of the AGA capabilities (to be on topic about AGA).

The main problem is that the game runs in "slow motion" and thus it is not playable nor fun.


I've seen an head to head cd32;against Fatal Fury of Neo Geo and wasn't that bad performance wise, given amiga limitations. Big sprites et all, perhaps art wise not as good, but Fatal Fury has a way bigger budget

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 31-Oct-2022 6:11:18
#512 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 4656
From: Australia

@cdimauro

Quote:
Which is a completely different thing. Why do you change the discussion? This is a logical fallacy.

"Fightin Spirit" has a dead game world.

You can't handle the fact that "Fightin Spirit" AGA is a joke next to SNES SF2.

Besides Doom, there are many SF2 tech demo attempts on the Amiga

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYZdho3DDX8 (AGA, stock Amiga A1200, roughly 120 colours 2x 128x128 Sprites).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4khkkLpwI0 (AGA, stock Amiga A1200)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkG0_FDTWSc (OCS 64 color EHB, stock Amiga 500 needs Fast RAM, I tested this SF2 tech demo on physical Amiga 500 with Fast RAM). Stock Amiga A1200 runs this tech demo just fine.


Quote:

And how many colors it used? Have you checked them or you only focuses on the parallex?

There's a workload balance issue with "Fightin Spirit".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYZdho3DDX8 (AGA, stock Amiga A1200, roughly 120 colours
2x 128x128 Sprites).


Quote:

Which isn't floor parallax.

I didn't say it was floor parallax, but it gave gameworld to be less static dead.

Last edited by Hammer on 31-Oct-2022 at 06:12 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 31-Oct-2022 at 06:11 AM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, TF1260, 68060 @ 63 Mhz, 128 MB)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi3a/Emu68)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
cdimauro 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 31-Oct-2022 6:12:15
#513 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3104
From: Germany

@bhabbott

Quote:

bhabbott wrote:
Quote:

cdimauro wrote:

As I've written before:
However this doesn't stop me to analyze technical facts and share my opinion

Double-standard noted.

Which double-standard? I only see that you continue your falsification by carefully removing parts of my writings.
Quote:
Quote:
In fact: https://www.edaboard.com/threads/how-to-reverse-the-order-of-bits-in-vhdl.65136/

[i]B(0 to 63) [less]= A(63 downto 0); // Replaced the minor symbol with "less" because of the forum which doesn't like this symbol.

This is the code required for a bit reversal operation. Change 63 to 15 and you've the mirror of a 16 bit word

This works out of the box for Amiga sprites.

For the Blitter you need another (ONE) change when the hardware flipping is enabled for a channel (A or B): decrement the pointer instead of incrementing it, after having fetched a word from memory.

That's it. Sooooo much complicated, eh?

Oh sure, the VHDL code for the core effect is trivial (who would have guessed?).

Not you, certainly.
Quote:
Now show us how many transistors are needed to implement it in the Amiga chipset.

Not my expertise.

My guess is that it requires much less than implementing HAM mode.
Quote:
Quote:
Any information about such games?

What do you want - code, graphics, game design notes? It was 35-40 years ago and too many things have happened for me to remember the details. All my backups were stolen in 1991 so I have very little from before that. Since then I have had several 'spring cleans' and threw away most of my 'old junk' (AKA valuable retro computer stuff, sniff!).

You should recall at least the technical specs of your games.
Quote:
Quote:
The single, weak, implementation isn't a proof of the general statement. Again, it's elementary logic.

Actually it's very relevant. You accuse Commodore's engineers of being 'not smart' for not putting flipping logic in the Amiga, but the only other contemporary home computer chip designer that did implemented it in a crude and inefficient way, even though Yamaha had an excellent reputation. It's almost like they didn't think it was a particularly important feature (not even enough to mention in the technical reference manual).

Again, irrelevant and a logical fallacy: this is not a (single) argument which could attack the general statement.

Second, even more important, the MSX2 Blitter wasn't doing masking (as you reported) but this says nothing against the bit reversal operation, which was performed. So, it's the Blitter implementation itself which is limited and this has nothing to do with the bit reversal implementation.

So, you're judging the bit reversal implementation by complaining against the lack of masking: two completely different things. Which means, another logical fallacy.
Quote:
Quote:
The job isn't "a little" easier. And they don't say yes for everything because they are lazy.

It's actually barely easier at all. Drawing the graphics is a little easier for the artist - but you have to be careful not make the mirroring too obvious, and so have less freedom in the character design.

That's all about the graphic artists work.
Quote:
A bit of memory is saved

No: A LOT of memory is saved. Otherwise we weren't here talking about it.
Quote:
which may make game design and programming easier if space is tight

It wasn't about easy programming: it was about having the possibility to fit more stuff which enriched the games or improve the games performances.

A bit reversal operation is a very simple thing which doesn't require arcane science: we implemented on Fightin' Spirit, as I've said, by using a 128kB LuT. But the problem was all about performances, which made the game running at 17-12FPS. That's why we dropped this solution when I've invented my trick.
Quote:
but space is always tight when you expand the game to fit it.

Absolutely false: you don't have to expand graphic by having the bit reversal implemented. The graphic assets are kept as they are and reversed on the flying internally by the chipset.
Quote:
Quote:
Things aren't always mutually exclusive. And in this case the implementation was trivial and required just a bunch of logic: see above.

Trivial sure - in VHDL. But Jay Miner wasn't working with modern FPGAs with their synthesis and simulation tools. He had to create a working machine using discrete TTL logic ICs wire-wrapped on a dozen huge breadboards. This then had to be painstakingly converted to an ASIC transistor layout, drawn by hand to make photographic masks - a very long and involved process which could take months and wasn't proved until the chips were manufactured and put into the computer.

Right, and moving bit 0 to bit 15, bit 1 to bit 14, etc. required so much logic in your opinion that couldn't be implemented on the Amiga?
Quote:
People today have it so easy with modern FPGAs and the tools used to produce logic for them. I have worked with GALs which are less sophisticated but still much easier than using discrete logic. But I prefer to design with standard logic chips where practicable because I like the physicality of it, as well as the challenge.

I also had experience with that when I was at the high-school: discrete logic chips, breadboards, wires flying around, and leds to implement elementary circuits. Fortunately after 33 yeas this is Stone Age technology and I prefer to keep it hidden on my deepest memory.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
cdimauro 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 31-Oct-2022 6:20:03
#514 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3104
From: Germany

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote:
@cdimauro

Quote:
Which is a completely different thing. Why do you change the discussion? This is a logical fallacy.

"Fightin Spirit" has a dead game world.

Repeating it does prove nothing about the discussion. Plus, on 1996 the whole Amiga market was dead.
Quote:
You can't handle the fact that "Fightin Spirit" AGA is a joke next to SNES SF2.

Well, only a foul can compare it to the SF2 version for SNES.

You like to win easy, eh? Comparing what was possible on a computer which wasn't born for making games against a console (which was dedicated for it) sold more than 5 (FIVE) years after it. Only you could have done it...
Quote:
Besides Doom, there are many SF2 tech demo attempts on the Amiga

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYZdho3DDX8 (AGA, stock Amiga A1200, roughly 120 colours 2x 128x128 Sprites).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4khkkLpwI0 (AGA, stock Amiga A1200)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkG0_FDTWSc (OCS 64 color EHB, stock Amiga 500 needs Fast RAM, I tested this SF2 tech demo on physical Amiga 500 with Fast RAM). Stock Amiga A1200 runs this tech demo just fine.

Tech demos, as YOU said. And for the Amiga 1200.

Whereas Fightin' Spirit was a concrete product and it was running on a stock Amiga OCS + 512kB of extra mem...
Quote:
Quote:

And how many colors it used? Have you checked them or you only focuses on the parallex?

There's a workload balance issue with "Fightin Spirit".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYZdho3DDX8 (AGA, stock Amiga A1200, roughly 120 colours
2x 128x128 Sprites).

So, you were talking about Body Blows AGA, I've replied on that, and you reply but putting a link to a completely different thing (a tech demo).

You're the king of logical fallacies!
Quote:
Quote:

Which isn't floor parallax.

I didn't say it was floor parallax, but it gave gameworld to be less static dead.

I've just pointed out that it wasn't floor parallax.

At the end they didn't made even the effort to implement it.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 31-Oct-2022 7:47:03
#515 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 4656
From: Australia

@cdimauro

Quote:

Repeating it does prove nothing about the discussion. Plus, on 1996 the whole Amiga market was dead.

Your 1996 argument is a red herring for the 1992-to-1993 time period.

Nintendo bundles co-processor accelerators with their SNES games to hold the line between SNES and N64's 1996 release.

For the European market, both SNES and AGA were released in 1992.

Quote:

Well, only a foul can compare it to the SF2 version for SNES.

You keep harping about "Fightin Spirit" virtues when it has a dead game world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0L6bhwi8EE
DOS PC's Mortal Kombat 1 ports beat console ports, and SNES's Mortal Kombat 1 port was pretty good.


Quote:

You like to win easy, eh? Comparing what was possible on a computer which wasn't born for making games against a console (which was dedicated for it) sold more than 5 (FIVE) years after it. Only you could have done it...

For the European market, both SNES and AGA were released in 1992.

This topic is about "How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993".

Quote:

So, you were talking about Body Blows AGA, I've replied on that, and you reply but putting a link to a completely different thing (a tech demo).

This topic is not limited to your single game.

Besides Elf Mania, Body Blows Galactic AGA's parallax layer game world is competitive against lower bar Neo Geo's Fatal Fury's parallax layer game world.

Quote:

I've just pointed out that it wasn't floor parallax.

The floor still has movement and mirror effects instead of a dead game world.

https://youtu.be/MbmGLeM8bXc?t=984
This Body Blows Galactic ECS's waterfall stage also has floor movement and mirror effects but missing AGA's foreground layer.



_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, TF1260, 68060 @ 63 Mhz, 128 MB)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi3a/Emu68)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 31-Oct-2022 8:01:36
#516 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 4656
From: Australia

@cdimauro

Quote:

And how many colors it used? Have you checked them or you only focuses on the parallax?

It's a goto argument from console fanboys against the Amiga.

Quote:

Yes, and? They both don't have the colors of Fightin' Spirit and great number of animations and players effects.

The game world is still dead, hence there's a workload balance issue.

Many SF2 tech demos for the Amiga are focusing on parallax!

SF2 and Doom are the two major games that caused lasting impressions against the Amiga.


Quote:

Yes, and? They both don't have the colors of Fightin' Spirit and great number of animations and players effects.

The game world is still dead, hence there's a workload balance issue.


Quote:

PiStorm = a monster compared to the Amiga hardware.

PiStorm is removed and reverted back to Wicher 508i.

Monster 68K CPU doesn't accelerate Amiga's SF2.

I'm building another stock A500 Rev5 motherboard with Fast RAM against you.

Quote:

Why didn't you tested it on WinUAE with your Ryzen?

Monster 68K CPU doesn't accelerate Amiga's SF2.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, TF1260, 68060 @ 63 Mhz, 128 MB)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi3a/Emu68)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
cdimauro 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 31-Oct-2022 8:58:09
#517 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3104
From: Germany

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote:
@cdimauro

Quote:

Repeating it does prove nothing about the discussion. Plus, on 1996 the whole Amiga market was dead.

Your 1996 argument is a red herring for the 1992-to-1993 time period.

Well, you know what: the game was released on 1996. Like other Amiga games.
Quote:
Nintendo bundles co-processor accelerators with their SNES games to hold the line between SNES and N64's 1996 release.

Do you want that Amiga games did the same? And how much it would have costed a game for the customers, then?
Quote:
For the European market, both SNES and AGA were released in 1992.

Sure. In fact Fightin' Spirit was also released for AGA, after the OCS version.
Quote:
Quote:

Well, only a foul can compare it to the SF2 version for SNES.

You keep harping about "Fightin Spirit" virtues when it has a dead game world.

Show me how you can do better on an OCS Amiga. Keeping the same features, of course.
Quote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0L6bhwi8EE
DOS PC's Mortal Kombat 1 ports beat console ports, and SNES's Mortal Kombat 1 port was pretty good.

Where are the hardware requirements for PC which ran Mortal Kombat?

Plus, have you seen the Amiga port? I don't think so...
Quote:
Quote:

You like to win easy, eh? Comparing what was possible on a computer which wasn't born for making games against a console (which was dedicated for it) sold more than 5 (FIVE) years after it. Only you could have done it...

For the European market, both SNES and AGA were released in 1992.

Sure, and?
Quote:
This topic is about "How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993".

And what wasn't clear to you that the topic derailed?
Quote:
Quote:

So, you were talking about Body Blows AGA, I've replied on that, and you reply but putting a link to a completely different thing (a tech demo).

This topic is not limited to your single game.

Correct. But YOU changed the topic AFTER that I gave an answer to YOUR precise statement. This is a logical fallacy.
Quote:
Besides Elf Mania, Body Blows Galactic AGA's parallax layer game world is competitive against lower bar Neo Geo's Fatal Fury's parallax layer game world.

Actually Body Blow wasn't, if you compare the games.

Anyway, the games have different engines.
Quote:
Quote:

I've just pointed out that it wasn't floor parallax.

The floor still has movement and mirror effects instead of a dead game world.

https://youtu.be/MbmGLeM8bXc?t=984
This Body Blows Galactic ECS's waterfall stage also has floor movement and mirror effects but missing AGA's foreground layer.

Do you recognize that this water effect is just color-cycling? And the mirror is a banal bitplanes modulo.
Quote:

Hammer wrote:
@cdimauro

Quote:

And how many colors it used? Have you checked them or you only focuses on the parallax?

It's a goto argument from console fanboys against the Amiga.

It's a valid argument, because it says a lot about the game engine and how it compares to systems which were specifically designed for making games.

Do you know that Fightin' Spirit, Elfman, Body Blows, etc. were... games?
Quote:
Quote:

Yes, and? They both don't have the colors of Fightin' Spirit and great number of animations and players effects.

The game world is still dead, hence there's a workload balance issue.

Ah, ok. Then your preferences is towards having something moving on scenario instead of a better game play (more animations, special moves, energy bubbles, etc.).

Understood.
Quote:
Many SF2 tech demos for the Amiga are focusing on parallax!

In fact they are... demos.
Quote:
SF2 and Doom are the two major games that caused lasting impressions against the Amiga.

For Doom the hardware was too much limited.

For SF2, a better port was needed.
Quote:
Quote:

Yes, and? They both don't have the colors of Fightin' Spirit and great number of animations and players effects.

The game world is still dead, hence there's a workload balance issue.

So you quoted the SAME sentence TWO times and gave the same replies TWO times as well.

But I'll not repeat my answer again: it's up and you can read it.
Quote:
Quote:

PiStorm = a monster compared to the Amiga hardware.

PiStorm is removed and reverted back to Wicher 508i.

ROFL You're incredible! It WAS you that has written this:

This SF2 tech demo runs very smooth on A500 with PiStorm.

And NOW you say that you removed it. WHO CARES!!! I've just replied to what you said: the SF2 tech demo runs smoon on... rolling drum... PiStorm! Because that's what YOU've written and I've replied... rolling drum... "just" to that.

Now you're saying that your removed the PiStorm, which is totally different.

Logic is NOT your friend...
Quote:
Monster 68K CPU doesn't accelerate Amiga's SF2.

Actually it should IIF PiStorm accelerates the tech demo. Right?
Quote:
I'm building another stock A500 Rev5 motherboard with Fast RAM against you.

Against me?!? For what?!? : Do you read yourself before clicking the submit button?

Completely crazy.
Quote:
Quote:
Why didn't you tested it on WinUAE with your Ryzen?

Monster 68K CPU doesn't accelerate Amiga's SF2.

Again, repeating the same thing. A broken record...

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Massi 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 31-Oct-2022 20:16:52
#518 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 2-Feb-2011
Posts: 627
From: Rome, Italy

@cdimauro

You are not listed in the credits of Fighting Spirit, here you cannot escape incompetent opinionist.

When did they kick you out ?

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hammer 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 1-Nov-2022 0:46:18
#519 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 9-Mar-2003
Posts: 4656
From: Australia

@cdimauro

Quote:

Well, you know what: the game was released on 1996. Like other Amiga games.

This topic is about "How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993". Citing Fight'n Fightin Spirit AGA as a good example for Amiga AGA is flawed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33kH9DdNznA
https://youtu.be/jRIShhwDuxo?t=1172
Street Fighter II AGA tech demo from Pixel Shade.

On the SNES, Fatal Fury is subpar when compared to Street Fighter 2, Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo, and Mortal Kombat 2. Fatal Fury on SNES example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Pmr4q8hVw4


Quote:

Do you want that Amiga games did the same? And how much it would have costed a game for the customers, then?

The difference is Commodore UK's David Pleasance and large 3rd party game companies wanted out-of-the-box accelerated equipped A1200 bundle SKU, and Wing Commander wouldn't be a fcking joke with an inferior end-user experience.

Commodore's economies of scale are superior when compared to smaller 3rd party CPU accelerator providers for the Amiga.

There is a price segment gap between baseline Amiga 1200 and Amiga 4000/030.

Both David Pleasance's POV and Nintendo's have similar approaches when it comes to accelerated hardware bundles, but out-of-the-box accelerated Amiga game bundle benefits multiple 3rd party games while Nintendo's bundle approach is per game basis. The focus is the hassle-free end-user experience at a reasonable price range.

Quote:

Where are the hardware requirements for PC which ran Mortal Kombat?

486SX-25 will run Mortal Kombat 2 at low detail settings with playable frame rates. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abGjoiih1V4
Mortal Kombat 2 at low details setting has parallax layers and a parallax floor. This is like throwing 68LC040 @ 25 Mhz or 68030 @ 50Mhz at the problem.

Graphics settings or Mortal Kombat PC's performance guideline https://youtu.be/o0L6bhwi8EE?t=247
Low = 386
Medium = 486
High = 486 VL-Bus

Hint: According to Steam, RTX 3080 Ti and RTX 3090 install base outnumbered the entire Radeon RX 6600/6700/6700 XT/6800/6800 XT/6900 XT install base. LOL

PC DOS Doom 1 and 2 has sold about 4 million copies.

The gaming PC market has sizeable gamers with cash to burn despite being a minority in the very large PC market.

Quote:

Sure. In fact Fightin' Spirit was also released for AGA, after the OCS version.

This topic is about "How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993". Citing Fight'n Fightin Spirit AGA as a good example for Amiga AGA is flawed.

Quote:

Show me how you can do better on an OCS Amiga. Keeping the same features, of course.

Irrelevant for the "How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993" topic.

The recent SF2 game tech demo with 64 color EHB (6-bit planes), a parallax layer, and a parallax floor run fine on A500 with Fast RAM or stock Amiga 1200.

Quote:

In fact hey are... demos.

In fact, they are game tech demos.

Quote:

Sure, and?

This topic is about "How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993"

Quote:

Correct. But YOU changed the topic AFTER that I gave an answer to YOUR precise statement. This is a logical fallacy.

FALSE.

Quote:

Actually Body Blow wasn't, if you compare the games.

Anyway, the games have different engines.

Being different engines is irrelevant for "How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993".

Quote:

Do you recognize that this water effect is just color-cycling? And the mirror is a banal bitplanes modulo.

It's a low-bar method to make the game world to be less dead.

Quote:

It's a valid argument, because it says a lot about the game engine and how it compares to systems which were specifically designed for making games.

Do you know that Fightin' Spirit, Elfman, Body Blows, etc. were... games?

The are many Amiga gamers who wanted Elfmina's game world effects to be applied to Amiga's Mortal Kombat, Mortal Kombat 2, and Street Fighter 2 game ports.

From Amiga's many Street Fighter 2 game tech demos releases, Street Fighter 2 remains as a bleeding wound just like Doom e.g. Dread reflects the Amiga scene's "What If" when a proper developer effort was applied for the A500.


Quote:

And NOW you say that you removed it. WHO CARES!!! I've just replied to what you said: the SF2 tech demo runs smoon on... rolling drum... PiStorm! Because that's what YOU've written and I've replied... rolling drum... "just" to that.

I fcking remove the fcking PiStorm, just for you!!!!!

Last edited by Hammer on 01-Nov-2022 at 02:06 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 01-Nov-2022 at 01:43 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 01-Nov-2022 at 01:41 AM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 32 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080
Amiga 1200 (rev 1D1, KS 3.2, TF1260, 68060 @ 63 Mhz, 128 MB)
Amiga 500 (rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi3a/Emu68)

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
cdimauro 
Re: How good or bad was the AGA chipset in 1992/1993.
Posted on 1-Nov-2022 7:39:38
#520 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 29-Oct-2012
Posts: 3104
From: Germany

@Massi

Quote:

Massi wrote:
@cdimauro

You are not listed in the credits of Fighting Spirit, here you cannot escape incompetent opinionist.

First, now we know that you aren't even able to read.

Second, you can ALSO find my name listed here: http://www.dizionariovideogiochi.it/doku.php?id=fightin_spirit#intervista_giacinto_platania

Third, in a couple of months it will be published a big interview of the whole team where a lot of details will be shared.
Quote:
When did they kick you out ?

In your wet dreams.

Why don't you ask it to my teammates? You've their names and you can easily find most of them on some social medias (FB, primarily). It's pretty easy and fast: go on and let us know: I can't wait.

Anyway, I see that you're still burning because you aren't able to rebut my replies so you started inventing things (Goebble's propaganda: you miss nothing!) only to satisfy your violated ago.

Does it confort you, little Massi? Then you can go on: no problem from side.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 Next Page )

[ home ][ about us ][ privacy ] [ forums ][ classifieds ] [ links ][ news archive ] [ link to us ][ user account ]
Copyright (C) 2000 - 2019 Amigaworld.net.
Amigaworld.net was originally founded by David Doyle