Re: [stella] Gunfight 2600: One Step Forward & Two Steps Back

Subject: Re: [stella] Gunfight 2600: One Step Forward & Two Steps Back
From: Manuel Polik <manuel.polik@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:38:28 +0100
Glenn Saunders wrote:
> At 03:31 PM 2/26/2001 +0100, you wrote:
> >Some thoughts later... I was just wondering... when I accept this as a
> >good compromise anyway - then why turning 90° ?!? :-)
> 1) to be able to use two sprites to paint each character (16 bit wide or
> 2-color per scanline possible)

Doing the 2-color variant was my first thought, too.

> 2) to be able to go back to single line resolution

This might be hard for some reasons, I'll tell you later more about the
problems/disadvantages I see in a 90° shift...

> 3) to be able to reserve all your processor time to draw the middle objects

100% agreed. With the sideways approach, all I've left is the playfield.
> I don't blame you if you don't like the other perspective, but you have to
> remember that you've still got your work cut out for you if you do it the
> old way.

With the old perspective I've one big advantage: (Nearly) full-screen
movement freedom of the players. You might for example be able to chase
your oponent around the cactus if you like :-)

And there's one very special aspect in the the 90° turned approach:

Supposed there's 5 horizontal segments like this:


You'd have to do some repositioning whenever reaching a segment border.

Now - how display the bullets, when they cross the border?

Ok, before finally making a descission about the perspective, I'll
finish the animation of my sprites, since I could use that in both
approaches :-)


Archives (includes files) at
Unsub & more at

Current Thread