At 10:33 PM 4/24/01 -0400, you wrote:
And that's hardly remarkable in the computing world, anyway. No PC since
maybe an early Pentium has been pushed anywhere near its full potential
(Quake for DOS was about the last game fully hand-optimized in assembly
and more dependent on the CPU than a 3D accelerator.) The 7800 and Jaguar
never came near their full potential.
The interesting thing is that the programmers on the list pretty much have
taken the stock 2600 to its limits a number of times. Until illegal
opcodes and crazied cycle counting is old hat to the list as a whole,
though, I doubt many people will feel like tackling the SC with the same zeal.
The SC probably sits right in the same boat with the 7800 and Jag -- a
"system" (if you will) that came a little past its peak time. But the SC
does seem to sit right nicely in queue after the 2600 for "Where do I go
for next my retro-programming challenge?" (though the Game Boy probably has
more lure, I'd imagine, even if it's not next in line)
But as an earlier poster (already delt'd; sorry) remarked, it seems that
most 2600 game finishers quickly burn-out around the time that their game
is 80% done and really have to push to finish up. I agree that I just
don't see that many dying to get the "extra challenge" of the SC off their
respective chests.
*wink wink, nudge nudge* ;^)
Ruffin Bailey
-
Archives (includes files) at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/
Unsub & more at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/
