Subject: Re: [stella] VCS C programming From: "Fred Quimby" <c9r@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 00:06:57 -0400 |
>Now I know that the resulting games would not be as groundbreaking >and distinctive as all-from-scratch 2600 games. But as you say, it would >broaden the hobby. And the actual creating of the tool itself >would be *very* groundbreaking and distinctive, since everyone has >taken it as an article of faith that it Can't Be Done. (: I'd be surprised if anyone said it can't be done. I have seen discussions in the past that indeed said it would be difficult but certainly not impossible, as long as you used prepackaged kernels. Now, I hate to be the only dissenter here, but I think this is all a bad idea, given the requirement for prepackaged kernels! Perpackaged kernels lead to games that are all essentially the same. I think that "less than groundbreaking" is an understatement. I think that this would not broaden the hobby at all, but instead diminish it with a flood of games that are mostly bad or at best mediocre, or perhaps even discourage programmers like me who have spent countless hours trying to do real 2600 programming, essentially killing the hobby with a mini-crash reminiscent of the original crash of '82-'83. Well, perhaps others know better than I do, but I have finished two 1k minigames and am writing my third 2600 game. My games are not technically superior, but I do know that they required custom, unique kernels and would not work at all with any sort of canned kernel. Archives (includes files) at http://www.biglist.com/lists/stella/archives/ Unsub & more at http://stella.biglist.com
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [stella] VCS C programming, David Galloway | Thread | Re: [stella] VCS C programming, Kirk Israel |
Re: [stella] Paddle controller docs, Eric Ball | Date | Re: [stella] VCS C programming, Kirk Israel |
Month |