Re: [stella] JoustPong: maybe ditch "poorlords" wall

Subject: Re: [stella] JoustPong: maybe ditch "poorlords" wall
From: KirkIsrael@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 12 Jan 2004 04:15:52 -0000
> KirkIsrael  wrote:
> > Actually, it is based on a very non-linear motion model, in terms
> > of interia...the trouble is it feels less like it because of...
> > well, rounding I guess you'd say, it's not quantized finely enough.
> IMO you should try to use a more "natural" physic model. It's really
> no big deal to do that and it's much more satisfying for the player if
> the flaps behave like they want to.

Well, like I said, it is a very "natural" physics model:
each player has a vertical speed. GRavity adds to the speed
at a constant rate, the speed is added to the vertical position
at a constant rate, a flap subtracts a certain amount from the 
vertical speed.
> > "Perfected" is such a funny word...there really isn't an objective
> > measurement for it.
> True, but I have to agree with Glenn here. Try to get the physics
> right first (unless you think they are like they should be now). This
> will make the whole process of testing features and optimizing the
> gameplay much easier.

Actually, I think mucking w/ the physics is generally pretty easy.
Just make sure by the end of the VBLANK, the vertical positions for 
P0 and P1 have been decided...

Part of the problem might be early on I had to go to a 2 line kernal,
which reduces the smoothness. Though maybe I could calculate position
as if it were a 1 line kernal, and then just divide by 2....I mean 
that is the issue, akin to the "fractional speed" the list was mentioning
before...for simplicity I use 'natural' values like clock counts and 
pixels rather than keeping track of smaller values

"Power corrupts.  Absolute power is kind of neat."
        --John Lehman, secretary of the navy 1981-1987

Archives (includes files) at
Unsub & more at

Current Thread