Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga.misc:1327 comp.sys.mac.misc:9081 comp.sys.mac.games:3199 comp.sys.amiga.games:4772
Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!eru!kth.se!sunic!news.funet.fi!funic!santra!hila.hut.fi!jmunkki
From: jmunkki@hila.hut.fi (Juri Munkki)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.mac.games,comp.sys.amiga.games
Subject: Re: Mac and Amiga (Games--Macintosh vs A500)
Message-ID: <1991Mar4.050052.22982@santra.uucp>
Date: 4 Mar 91 05:00:52 GMT
References: <27253@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> <1991Mar3.223546.12173@rice.edu>
Sender: news@santra.uucp (Cnews - USENET news system)
Reply-To: jmunkki@hila.hut.fi (Juri Munkki)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, FINLAND
Lines: 96

In article <1991Mar3.223546.12173@rice.edu> robbins@arcadien.rice.edu (Thomas Robbins) writes:
>However, I'm disappointed with the entertainment/sound/video. I have
>just been shocked at seeing a friend's Amiga 500, with its mere 7MHz
>68000, for crying out loud, BLOW AWAY my 68030 Mac with the Amiga video
>clippings, sound/music emulation, and GAMES.
>
>What's the deal? My friend says that it's because it has built-in
>graphics co-processors.

This group has been through this discussion a few times, but I feel that
it might be time to talk about these things again.

The real bottleneck on our fast 68030-based machines is NuBUS. NuBUS
video cards have an effective RAM access time of 300 ns. Compare this
with 120 ns on the Mac II and 80 ns on the IIci. There is no way to
get faster access to the video card, so changing a large area on the
screen is quite hard to do without a coprocessor sitting on the video
card.

The Amiga is much more powerful for game graphics for several reasons. First,
it has the grahics coprocessor chips that allow easy double buffering and
quick access to bitmaps. Second, it doesn't use "chunky" pixel maps. The
amiga has separate bitplanes for each bit in the pixel. If you want to
change 32 pixels on the screen and you want to do it really quickly, you
do not need to change more than 32 bits. Of course one has hardware sprites
to work with too. While they are somewhat limited, they are just fine for
most games. (Disclaimer: I've never programmed the Amiga. I was just _very_
interested when I first read about the Lorraine computer from Amiga Inc.)

This doesn't mean that you can't develop good games for the Macintosh.
It just means that if a games programmer wants to write games, he/she
will more probably either choose the amiga, because it's so nice to work
with or the PC, because you can make more money with PC games.

>I'm actually considering buying one of these, to supplement my mac.
>(Heaven help me--a machine with DOS!) IS IT WORTH IT? I would use it
>only for games, but I worry at buying a machine that's already four
>years old, what with computer equipment being obsolete even before the
>ink on your check is dry. And heck, it's only about the price of a good
>modem!

A graphics accelerator will probably make your normal applications work
faster, but most games will not benefit from it. People will certainly
not start developing games just because you bought a graphics accelerator.

Let me tell you about Project STORM.

I said that you can't modify large areas on the screen. The Mac also comes
in a large variety of screen sizes and depths. The most typical depth on
color macs is probably 8 bits/pixel, so that's what STORM currently supports.
The remaining problem is to limit the amount of data to move to and from the
card and to make the game scale up nicely on a 19" high resolution monitor.

The solution that was chosen for STORM was to use vector graphics. Vectors
are thin lines, so only a small percentage of the pixels on the screen need
modification even when a large amount of animation appears to be happening
on the screen. Vector games are also extremely easy to scale to any screen
size.

Project STORM works equally well on a 320x200 screen (who knows, maybe there
will be a PC or Amiga version with low resolution support) as on a two page
2048x1024 monitor. (A faster processor is recommended for large screens, but
you can do very well without.)

We are now very close to completion. The game does 20 frames of double
buffered color animation. We are compatible with multifinder background
tasks running or even under A/UX. All you need is an 8 bit video card.
(IIci, si and LC internal video cards work too, of course.)

We are going to look for a publisher for STORM, the first demo copy
will go out on Friday. (To beta testers: don't worry, I'll send you
a new version soon [tomorrow or Wednesday]. You haven't been forgotten.)

It is quite possible that the animation toolkit that I wrote will be
available as shareware (with a license agreement for commercial
stuff).

It's possible to support the Sega 3D glasses with the animation kit,
so after STORM is ready, I'll start working on a game that allows you
to use the glasses for stereo 3D. (I have a few ideas, but nothing
concrete yet...maybe a tank game.)

One more thing:

	If you want more games for the Mac, start buying what there is
	now. Remember to pay for shareware games too. By supporting Mac
	game developers, you will increase the odds of them writing more
	games.

So, use your money for the games, not the accelerator. Macintosh graphics
accelerators are very different from the amiga chips anyway.

   ____________________________________________________________________________
  / Juri Munkki	    /  Helsinki University of Technology   /  Wind  / Project /
 / jmunkki@hut.fi  /  Computing Center Macintosh Support  /  Surf  /  STORM  /
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~