Right. Nice troll. Stratosphere looks pretty good though eh?
On 09/04/2008, Aleš Keprt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Guys, please be realistic. 3D on Sam sucks. > /--- > Aley > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Harte" < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no> > Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 3:35 PM > Subject: Attempts at 3d on the Sam? > > > Hi, > > I've just discovered pyz80 and am having a fresh bash at some Sam > projects. As I'm simultaneously working on a Freescape interpreter for > the PC, my thoughts have inevitably turned to 3d on the Sam, even if > it means a Freescape-style non-realtime display. I'm therefore curious > about lots of things, and have a multitude of questions: > > — besides Stratosphere, the F16 demo and that brief gameover bit in > Dyzonium, are there any other playable segments of games that > demonstrate 3d graphics? I know there are some demos with bits of 3d > graphics, but I figure that spending 256 kb on getting the fastest > possible rotating cube isn't a helpful guide. > > — has it been established whether the animated gifs of Chrome featured > on http://www.samcoupe.com/preview.htm represents the speed at which > the game would play on a real, unexpanded Sam? > > — is there any speed advantage to using the ROM routines such as > JDRAW, JPUT and/or JBLITZ? I appreciate that they are more general > case than routines that it makes sense to write for a game, but as I > understand it the ROM is uncontended? > > To be honest, I can imagine that something like Chrome could be done > with a live update since most of the display doesn't change between > most frames (it's just a bunch of vertical strips of colour that quite > often change height and occasionally change colour), and the > algorithms that are commonly used to calculate scenes such as that in > Chrome make it really cheap to calculate out a minimal list of the > required changes. > >
