3d Capabilities

[Winterkid]

Another reason for emulating a portable system is so you can just buy the carts and not the portable system. Cheaper.

 

[fitzsteve]

Another reason for emulating a portable system is so you can just buy the carts and not the portable system. Cheaper.

​

You mean download the Roms

 

[Winterkid]

Download roms? What is this event you speak of?

*grin* Also dragging a Gameboy Color or Pocket or the original Gameboy and like 10 cartridges is a pain in the ass, whereas with the GP32, a simple SMC, even just a 16 megger holds ten times that.

 

[lubidog]

No one here downloads roms!!!

 

[saintdragon]

can some one tell me if this is true or not, but one of my friends told me that to emulate a console that the console that you are running it on has to be like 10x more powerful or something like that??? does this only apply to computers???

i only use emulators for homebrew stuff not roms you do the same winterkid..

 

[Goity]

can some one tell me if this is true or not, but one of my friends told me that to emulate a console that the console that you are running it on has to be like 10x more powerful or something like that??? does this only apply to computers???

i only use emulators for homebrew stuff not roms you do the same winterkid..

​

That's not exactly truthful, but it's kinda a bit of a guideline, but it's not fully true.
Typically you could emulate n64 on gp32, but with barely any compatability and 1 frame per hour.

 

[GP40]

The Atari Lynx had hardware support for sprite scaling and 3D, plus it had two processors and it dont look like a dual screen game & watch

Whats it matter whether the GP can do 3D or not. Most 3D games are cack, many going on their lookings and when you actually get to play them the gameplay is non-existent and un-original.

Is it me or do other peeps prefer 2D games?
Give me a good 2D platformer such as Superfrog or Rich Dangerous and I'm happy

 

[Goity]

The Atari Lynx had hardware support for sprite scaling and 3D, plus it had two processors and it dont look like a dual screen game & watch

Whats it matter whether the GP can do 3D or not. Most 3D games are cack, many going on their lookings and when you actually get to play them the gameplay is non-existent and un-original.

Is it me or do other peeps prefer 2D games?
Give me a good 2D platformer such as Superfrog or Rich Dangerous and I'm happy

​

Wel, I do like good looking games, but I'd rather play some good 2d game than some dodgy 3d EA shite-game-of-an-overhyped-craptastic-movie-and-even-at-that-a-bad-representation-of-a-rubbish-movie

 

[Drag]

The good way to use 2 processors is like this:

One processor: MASTER! (hehehe)

other processor: Processes audio and misc. graphics stuff.



GP32:

One processor: Everything


At least, that's how I would see it.


Regarding 3d games: the latest 3d games seem to all be crappy. What is it about that 3rd dimension that makes good games so much harder to make?

 

[Squidge]

The Atari Lynx had hardware support for sprite scaling and 3D, plus it had two processors and it dont look like a dual screen game & watch

It did have hardware sprites with rotation and stuff, but it certainly didn't have hardware 3D support. Then again, the DS doesn't really have 3D support, but it does have a geometry engine and a maths co-processor, so it goes some way towards it...

Whats it matter whether the GP can do 3D or not. Most 3D games are cack, many going on their lookings and when you actually get to play them the gameplay is non-existent and un-original.

Is it me or do other peeps prefer 2D games?
Give me a good 2D platformer such as Superfrog or Rich Dangerous and I'm happy

​

Amen to that tho'

I've got a DS here, and although games like Mario64DS are nice to play, I can't bring myself to play it for long because the screen is SO DAMNED SMALL ! Anyone wanna buy a hardly used DS?

 

[GP40]

The Atari Lynx had hardware support for sprite scaling and 3D, plus it had two processors and it dont look like a dual screen game & watch 

It did have hardware sprites with rotation and stuff, but it certainly didn't have hardware 3D support. Then again, the DS doesn't really have 3D support, but it does have a geometry engine and a maths co-processor, so it goes some way towards it...

Whats it matter whether the GP can do 3D or not. Most 3D games are cack, many going on their lookings and when you actually get to play them the gameplay is non-existent and un-original.

Is it me or do other peeps prefer 2D games?
Give me a good 2D platformer such as Superfrog or Rich Dangerous and I'm happy

​

Amen to that tho'

I've got a DS here, and although games like Mario64DS are nice to play, I can't bring myself to play it for long because the screen is SO DAMNED SMALL ! Anyone wanna buy a hardly used DS?

​

I can remember buying my PS2 a few years back and straight after I lookied in the games shop and I couldn't really see a game I was really excited about. Nearly all the games I have for it now are old games, rainbow island/bubble bobble, metal slug (I've managed to crash that :lol.now I mention it, I realise that they are PS1 versions even.

It seems to me that in the present there are so many cack games about. True the mega drive, Amiga etc all had a lot of crap games made for them too, but I think the crap to class game ratio is very much worse. Back in the 'good ol days' the Amiga games came in them room sized cardboard boxes, which thankfully they got rid of cos they are way too big to fit in a shelf, but, each one had its own distinct design and they were often displayed front first.

Now you go into a computer shop and look at the games and you get a self with hundreds of PS2 boxes with their spines looking like a bookshelf of clones, all the same black & white boring standard design and it makes me feel not 'rsed to look through them if they can't be 'rsed to do designs for them.

Then there is the fact that AFAIK there are no big characters in games developers no more, with real well known people in them. Look along a collection of oldskool games and its easy to pick out games made from certain developers e.g. the bitmap brothers, bullfrog, team 17, snk. The same cant be said for modern games, they all just blend into one big foggy grey blob, so that when you look at a modern game, it could have come from any developer.

Anyway I've had my rant and got it off my chest :rolleyes:
I'm off to get me tea and play Rick Dangerous now

 

[lubidog]

The Atari Lynx had hardware support for sprite scaling and 3D, plus it had two processors and it dont look like a dual screen game & watch 

It did have hardware sprites with rotation and stuff, but it certainly didn't have hardware 3D support. Then again, the DS doesn't really have 3D support, but it does have a geometry engine and a maths co-processor, so it goes some way towards it...

Whats it matter whether the GP can do 3D or not. Most 3D games are cack, many going on their lookings and when you actually get to play them the gameplay is non-existent and un-original.

Is it me or do other peeps prefer 2D games?
Give me a good 2D platformer such as Superfrog or Rich Dangerous and I'm happy

​

Amen to that tho'

I've got a DS here, and although games like Mario64DS are nice to play, I can't bring myself to play it for long because the screen is SO DAMNED SMALL ! Anyone wanna buy a hardly used DS?

​

I can remember buying my PS2 a few years back and straight after I lookied in the games shop and I couldn't really see a game I was really excited about. Nearly all the games I have for it now are old games, rainbow island/bubble bobble, metal slug (I've managed to crash that :lol.now I mention it, I realise that they are PS1 versions even.

It seems to me that in the present there are so many cack games about. True the mega drive, Amiga etc all had a lot of crap games made for them too, but I think the crap to class game ratio is very much worse. Back in the 'good ol days' the Amiga games came in them room sized cardboard boxes, which thankfully they got rid of cos they are way too big to fit in a shelf, but, each one had its own distinct design and they were often displayed front first.

Now you go into a computer shop and look at the games and you get a self with hundreds of PS2 boxes with their spines looking like a bookshelf of clones, all the same black & white boring standard design and it makes me feel not 'rsed to look through them if they can't be 'rsed to do designs for them.

Then there is the fact that AFAIK there are no big characters in games developers no more, with real well known people in them. Look along a collection of oldskool games and its easy to pick out games made from certain developers e.g. the bitmap brothers, bullfrog, team 17, snk. The same cant be said for modern games, they all just blend into one big foggy grey blob, so that when you look at a modern game, it could have come from any developer.

Anyway I've had my rant and got it off my chest :rolleyes:
I'm off to get me tea and play Rick Dangerous now

​

Good post, think most of us would agree with this!

 

[Goity]

Yes you can, If it's crap then it's made by EA, if it's not, then it's Final Fantasy.

 

[GP40]

Found this:- http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/jikorhon/condev/gp32/docs.html

Edit: look under the heading 'GP32 and LCD DMA'

The page author suggests:-

But the GP32 LCD has linear frame buffer albeit it is rotated 90 degrees counter-clockwise. So the GP32 somewhat is ideal for 3D graphics and with its powerful and fast ARM processor complex 3D games are possible.

Oh and while I'm ranting :rolleyes: dont you just hate it how if new games are succesful they make a another and another and...in a short time span. When they say 'the game uses the same engine but this time the levels are tons better and the graphics are soo much sweeter'. OK, so it uses the same engine, IMHO thats not a new game then, thats a bonus/mission addon pack marketed to get maxim profit.

 

[Squidge]

Of course the GP32 can do complex 3D, look at gpQuake for an example

If you want better than that, you can always write it yourself.

 

[c0ncept]

Then there is the fact that AFAIK there are no big characters in games developers no more, with real well known people in them. Look along a collection of oldskool games and its easy to pick out games made from certain developers e.g. the bitmap brothers, bullfrog, team 17, snk. The same cant be said for modern games, they all just blend into one big foggy grey blob, so that when you look at a modern game, it could have come from any developer.

​

thats because games are so complex now there is no way that one person or even a small team could create a mainstream game, so large teams are needed for each bit (prgramming, grpahics etc.) however, there are a small amount of personalities left in the business. People like Peter Molyneux and some others that I can't rember of the top of my head.

But yeah, for the most part, the days when you could pick up a game and recognise the name of the creator on the box are pretty much long gone.

TBH I haven't been massivley excited over a modern games release since the days of the n64, man I was so hyped over the release of zeldaot and perfect dark!

 

[Jarska333]

Well, new Final Fantasy is an event.

 

[GP40]

Peter Molyneux B)

 

[mechanori]

What about Kojima, Miyamoto, Mizuguchi, the Panzer Dragoon guy, Will Wright...

There are still personalities.

 

[RichyX]

What about the Panzer Dragoon guy

I've been a Panzer fan for years I've never really heard of anyone being credited as Mr. Panzer Dragoon. Is there such a person?

Whatever happened to that 3D Rally demo that was released sometime last year.
Was very impressed with that.