Re: A83: on calc emu
[Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A83: on calc emu
I still think it would be easier to port every TI-82 asm game in existence
than to make an emulator which would take almost all of the TI-83's ram...
A better idea might be to make a universal include file for the TI-82/83 to
make sources compile for either platform. Some features would obviously need
macros for one or the other calculator and some features may need to be
excluded, but wouldn't this work better than an emulator? This would only
work for future games, but in my opinion there isn't enough worth writing an
emulator for right now. I don't think the Jezzball issue needs to be
visited... opps... Anyway, I guess I could fix the problems, but I have too
much scheduled for the immediate future.
I think everyone knows the other stuff I was going to say... oh well, who
really cares, it's an endless battle.
Joe Wingbermuehle
http://www.usmo.com/~joewing
-----Original Message-----
From: Evil Sam <evil_sam@hotmail.com>
To: assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org <assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org>
Date: Sunday, January 31, 1999 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: A83: on calc emu
>
>In defense of the 82...
>
>
>>The only feasible calc to emulate is the 82 because all the other calcs
>have
>>obviously larger screen sizes, but most games for the 82 are already
>for the
>>83.
>
> That's only because people like Ahmed El-Helw and myself took the
>time to make ports. I only port my own games, and Ahmed quit. Looks like
>the 83 won't be expecting 82 ports anytime soon (no offense to Jacob
>Boyce).
>
>> If you can think of one that's not, remind us about it and I'm sure
>>someone will port it... =P
>
> Who?
>
>How about 83 ports of:
> Jezzball (the 82 version is 20 times better than the 83 version by
>Joe W.)
> Lights Out
> Picross (83 version sucked)
> Same Game (it's better than Nagel's in my opinion, although neither
>have link play)
> MineSeeker
> Slippy
> Donkey Kong (not great, but a good game)
> Silmarils (an awesome fighting game currently in a demo)
> Dying Eyes (a great RPG)
> Worm (the only 82 game to have greyscale, although the gameplay
>itself is mediocre)
>
> Then are a number of non-ported mediocre games, good games in
>development, and even some OS-82 games.
>
>> I think that an 83 port of the same game on the
>>82 is even smaller because of such stuff like Libraries, so its not a
>good
>>idea to do emulation.
>
> Libraries are more of an annoyance than actually being beneficial.
>They also confuse most people (at my school anyway). Besides, should
>people use an 800 byte library to save on a 20 byte random number
>routine? Don't think so, or 120 byte library to use a 40 byte display
>routine(especially when grbufcpy_v will suffice)? Now if libraries were
>universally used in every game(which they aren't), their use would be
>justifiable.
> I don't have a strong anti-library feeling, I just don't believe they
>justify not making an 82 emulating shell.
>
>
>> Sure its a wild idea that hasnt been done, but is there
>>really a reason you might need this? Someone who has the capabilities
>to make
>>an on-calc emulator would rather work on some other project, and we
>would not
>>want them to waste their programming time on something like this...
>
> 82 emulation would be extremely practical and beneficial to the 83
>community and programmers/gamers, but for size reasons probably only
>once the 83 plus has been released.
> Once upon a time(early to mid-last year, before SOS), the 82 had
>much better games(and more of them) than the 83. Since then the 82 has
>really fallen in comparison to the 83, because many programmers have
>left for the 86 and not many can figure out how to do external programs
>on the 82(myself included).
> Sam
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>