Re: [stella] Dungeons

Subject: Re: [stella] Dungeons
From: "Thomas Jentzsch" <tjentzsch@xxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 17:31:46 +0200
Manuel wrote:
> > That's like saying that Starpath was cheating.  Heck no, they made it
> > work in the VCS, so it's hardly cheating, right?
> But... it is cheating! :-)

I agree with Manuel, to me it is some kind of cheating, too.

It's a completely different challenge to *learn* how to program with a SuperCharger (or DirectX etc.) than to *solve* problems which come from the limitations of the hardware. I can't exactly tell where this cheating starts for me(!) (bankswitching: maybe, Pitfall 2: yes, RAM-Plus: sure) but a SuperCharger which significantly enhances the capabilities of the VCS, well, that's not the plain VCS anymore. 

I'm not that puristic, that i'll never write a demo/game for the SuperCharger (if I get one), just to understand how it works. And I think that will be fun too.

But trying to squeeze as much as possible out of existing and very limited hardware, that's what makes 2600 programming fun. The limitations are obvious, everybody knows them, and many people have tried to find solutions. So that's some kind of brain contest for me.

When I remembered the 'illegal' opcodes, to get some free cycles in the 48 pixel routine for Thrust, that was ok for me, because I still used the same original hardware. Using an extension like the SuperCharger would have helped too, but that would have been too easy :)

> If I were to do a game on the superchager, I'd probably go for a game that'd normally need an Amiga :-)
Or a non-budget C64 game :)

Have Fun!
Thomas Jentzsch         | *** Every bit is sacred ! ***
tjentzsch at web dot de |

Die Fachpresse ist sich einig: WEB.DE 20mal Testsieger! Kostenlos E-Mail, 
Fax, SMS, Verschlüsselung, POP3, WAP....testen Sie uns!

Archives (includes files) at
Unsub & more at

Current Thread