rbogue@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu (Ross Bogue) (03/28/91)
This subject seems to come up quite regularly, but I'll jump in
just this once.
I am a college professor. I use my Amiga for other purposes besides the
occasional game. I *do* play games, though. If I start a VLT download
which I know will take at least an hour, or a simulation which will take
several days, I will flip screens and fire up a game from my hard disk.
If you wish to sell me a game, you must therefore:
1) Keep your fool hands off my operating system!
The sole reason for buying my Amiga was the OS. If I had wanted
a dedicated game machine, I would have bought one.
2) Don't mess with devices you have no business messing with.
I bought BattleChess a while back. Multitasks just fine, runs from
the HD, but steals the modem port. I wrote a nasty letter to the
publisher. (They sent a useless response.)
3) Don't assume you need all the CPU cycles.
My 25 MHz 68030 has plenty, thank you. And even if game response
does degrade, that's my business, not yours.
Incidently, I have in fact bought BattleChess, CarmenSanDiego/USA,
DesignoSaurus, DragonStrike, and Falcon. I have not yet checked whether
DStrike disables VLT. I am quite upset that Falcon destroys the OS, and
may return the game for that reason.
Ross Bogue
Illinois State University
Normal, ILforgeas@swinjm.UUCP (Jean-Michel Forgeas) (03/29/91)
In article <1991Mar28.001944.7281@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu>, Ross Bogue writes: > [...]. If I start a VLT download > which I know will take at least an hour, or a simulation which will take > several days, I will flip screens and fire up a game from my hard disk. Well I don't understand this. When I work, I work. When I play, I play. I cannot work and play. > 1) Keep your fool hands off my operating system! So one day you or somebody else will complain about the speed/scrolling, etc... to be of bad quality. You are not a lot to want that. > The sole reason for buying my Amiga was the OS. If I had wanted > a dedicated game machine, I would have bought one. You have bought the two machines in one. But to be good, some games require a one machine in one. > 2) Don't mess with devices you have no business messing with. I agree. If a game wants to leave the OS alive, it has to manage resources correctely. > 3) Don't assume you need all the CPU cycles. > > My 25 MHz 68030 has plenty, thank you. And even if game response > does degrade, that's my business, not yours. Again, you may think that's your business, but people who does and sells the game may think that it is his business too: he wants to have good articles about his game in magazines for example, because this represents more money. Think that the game have to be very good on a 68000 machine first. Sorry for your 68030 ;-) Effectively if all people had a 68030/68040 to play with, my arguments would be different. I think all people want a 68040 but majority can buy only a 68000. > Ross Bogue Best regards, Jean-Michel -- \___/ Jean-Michel Forgeas \-/ cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmfra!swinjm!forgeas | The Software Winery -^- And, where is the universe ?
jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup) (03/31/91)
In article <18e6c18b.ARN0c4c@swinjm.UUCP> forgeas@swinjm.UUCP (Jean-Michel Forgeas) writes: >In article <1991Mar28.001944.7281@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu>, Ross Bogue writes: > >> [...]. If I start a VLT download >> which I know will take at least an hour, or a simulation which will take >> several days, I will flip screens and fire up a game from my hard disk. > >Well I don't understand this. When I work, I work. When I play, I play. >I cannot work and play. I often play games while downloading/uploading large files on BIX, for example. Or I'll flip to a game and play for a while, then flip back to the compile I'd started, or back to my rlogin to cbmvax where I'm reading news, etc. >> 1) Keep your fool hands off my operating system! > >So one day you or somebody else will complain about the speed/scrolling, >etc... to be of bad quality. You are not a lot to want that. Most people here (including me) have stated that there are occasions when taking over the machine is warranted. There are games where it isn't warranted, including Lemmings. >Effectively if all people had a 68030/68040 to play with, my arguments >would be different. I think all people want a 68040 but majority >can buy only a 68000. Ah, the innocence of youth... :-) If A500's starting tomorrow had 68020's, or 68030's, or 68040's, there would still be people like Mike Schwartz or the guy flaming Mike Farren who would insist that in order for their games to be fast enough, they had to take over the machine. (It might take them a few months to figure out how to use up all the cycles, though.) -- Randell Jesup, Keeper of AmigaDos, Commodore Engineering. {uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!jesup, jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com BIX: rjesup Thus spake the Master Ninjei: "To program a million-line operating system is easy, to change a man's temperament is more difficult." (From "The Zen of Programming") ;-)
mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) (04/01/91)
In article <20212@cbmvax.commodore.com> jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup) writes: > Ah, the innocence of youth... :-) If A500's starting tomorrow >had 68020's, or 68030's, or 68040's, there would still be people like >Mike Schwartz or the guy flaming Mike Farren who would insist that in order >for their games to be fast enough, they had to take over the machine. (It >might take them a few months to figure out how to use up all the cycles, >though.) > Maybe, maybe not. When will Commodore start shipping A500's with 68030's? How much market penetration will it have and by when? These are the key factors in making me decide how to procede. People writing games for the PC have always had to program to the lowest common denominator: 4.77Mhz 8088, CGA, Tandy machines, etc. The PC market is at least changing. Those 4.77Mhz machines are losing market share to the point where game programmers are making EGA and UP games for 286 and up machines only now. But how long have those machines been around, and how many years has it taken to make the market share attractive enough to become the minimum supported machine? As far as using up all those clock cycles, it depends on what you want to do. If someone made a real time mandlebrot program, nobody would complain. If you used those cycles to do real-time raytracing to get better than TV quality 3d effects, it might be worth it. On the other hand, a scrolling shoot-em up wouldn't warrant it. We won't really know what people will do until we get there. >-- >Randell Jesup, Keeper of AmigaDos, Commodore Engineering. >{uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!jesup, jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com BIX: rjesup >Thus spake the Master Ninjei: "To program a million-line operating system >is easy, to change a man's temperament is more difficult." >(From "The Zen of Programming") ;-) -- ******************************************************** * Appendix A of the Amiga Hardware Manual tells you * * everything you need to know to take full advantage * * of the power of the Amiga. And it is only 10 pages! * ********************************************************
<DXB132@psuvm.psu.edu> (04/01/91)
In article <1991Apr1.114835.22354@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>, es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) says: > Deep market penetration of the 030 may be a little >unrealistic in the short term, but how about 1MB? How much worse >does a game that requires 1MB sell than a game which requires >512K? Unfortuntely, that extra 512K is not the chip RAM that most games need. Shadow of the Beast II code is less than 40K, the rest is graphics and sound, so there is little benefit in having 512K of slow RAM, except as a disk cache. And the extra 512K appears whereever, so the usual practice of ORGing code and data is out. Dungeon Master can use it (waste it) because it is a large Aztec C program that multitasks. -- Dan Babcock
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (04/01/91)
In article <mykes.0950@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG> mykes@amiga0.SF-Bay.ORG (Mike Schwartz) writes: > >Maybe, maybe not. When will Commodore start shipping A500's with 68030's? Deep market penetration of the 030 may be a little unrealistic in the short term, but how about 1MB? How much worse does a game that requires 1MB sell than a game which requires 512K? I seem to remember that when Dungeon Master first came out, it was a top seller. There have been a fair sprinkling of 1MB only games. The thing is that the A500 can be upgraded to 1MB (that is, if you didn't buy the A500P which comes with 1MB) for only $80. I just can't accept that people will refuse to upgrade their A500s if it costs so little. And the advantages are enormous! To you, the programmer, as well. You can pre-load sounds/images into RAM so I don't wait for 3 minutes for you to load a scene when the scene itself only lasts 2. I understand your arguments when it comes to getting a 60 fps rate. If it is the kind of game where that is essential, then you have to do it. But I don't understand not pushing for the 1MB barrier. The vast MAJORITY of machines in the US have 1MB, and I think it is pretty safe to say that the majority of European BUYERS of software (as opposed to traders) have 1MB. And if you programmed for 1MB, well, you could even leave the OS alive so that you could access the HD. -- Ethan Q: How many Comp Sci majors does it take to change a lightbulb A: None. It's a hardware problem.
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (04/02/91)
In article <91091.084701DXB132@psuvm.psu.edu> DXB132@psuvm.psu.edu writes: >In article <1991Apr1.114835.22354@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>, >es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) says: > >> Deep market penetration of the 030 may be a little >>unrealistic in the short term, but how about 1MB? How much worse >>does a game that requires 1MB sell than a game which requires >>512K? > >Unfortuntely, that extra 512K is not the chip RAM that most games >need. Shadow of the Beast II code is less than 40K, the rest is >graphics and sound, so there is little benefit in having 512K of slow >RAM, except as a disk cache. And the extra 512K appears whereever, so >the usual practice of ORGing code and data is out. Dungeon Master >can use it (waste it) because it is a large Aztec C program that >multitasks. But you can't knock using it as a Data Cache. Like I say, waiting for the disk to load up the next scene is quite tedious. Information can be pre-loaded into the extra 512K, all program code can be moved into it, and 40K does make a difference, also double-buffering can occur. And although that might not be fast enough for 60fps animation, it should be fast enough for digitized sound in many cases. > >-- Dan Babcock -- Ethan Q: How many Comp Sci majors does it take to change a lightbulb A: None. It's a hardware problem.