Wow, that is REALLY impressive.

My virus scanner is complaining of a trojan horse virus when I follow that link. x_x;

Gemini000 wrote:

My virus scanner is complaining of a trojan horse virus when I follow that link. x_x;

False positive perhaps? I'm using Avast and Ad Block Plus.

Here's the direct link to the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7h3H-_8N_o

I had no complaints from my virus scanner, but maybe whatever caused yours to act up was blocked by noscript & adblock plus on my side 😉

I don't use ad-blockers so yeah, possibly a malformed or malicious ad. Avast is my virus scanner.

Mystery wrote:

Here's the direct link to the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7h3H-_8N_o

I had no complaints from my virus scanner, but maybe whatever caused yours to act up was blocked by noscript & adblock plus on my side 😉

I didn't want to post a direct link to the video because the last time I did that the thread was locked.

Oh, I didin't know, sorry about that, didn't want to cause you (or your thread 😉) any trouble.

This is cool, but I prefer MooD for the C64 as it could more feasibly be tweaked into a full-featured game. I could be wrong, but in terms of engines I think real 3D gets you more bang for your buck on old PCs than raycasters.

bucket wrote:

This is cool, but I prefer MooD for the C64 as it could more feasibly be tweaked into a full-featured game. I could be wrong, but in terms of engines I think real 3D gets you more bang for your buck on old PCs than raycasters.

Actually, no. 2.5D games like Duke Nukem 3D or Shadow Warrior could be run in 640x480 at over 30 fps even on old Pentium/AMD K5 processors while games like Quake had to run in 320x200. Wolfenstein 3D could run in 20 fps or so on a 16 Mhz 286 with a Tseng videocard while most early polygon games were 16 color EGA slideshows. Look at Hard Drivin on the C64 to see how "real 3D" ran on the 8-bits.

m1so wrote:

Look at Hard Drivin on the C64 to see how "real 3D" ran on the 8-bits.

C64 basics: there's no multiply operation. Good luck with 3d.

Multiplication was very slow on 8088/8086 (80-100 clocks for 8bit -> 16bit, even more for 16bit -> 32bit) so this alone doesn't make a large difference. Multiplication on 80286 was much faster.

Sol_HSA wrote:

m1so wrote:

Look at Hard Drivin on the C64 to see how "real 3D" ran on the 8-bits.

C64 basics: there's no multiply operation. Good luck with 3d.

To compare, here is some raycasted 3D on 8-bit computers:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVFn_djQ6EY Gate Crasher on Tandy Color Computer 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuZywAxfGkw Project M on the Atari XL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29sTZedLcWk Midi Maze on Atari XL

So it is clear that "2.5D" engines are far better for the 8-bits than polygonal 3D.

Sol_HSA wrote:

m1so wrote:

Look at Hard Drivin on the C64 to see how "real 3D" ran on the 8-bits.

C64 basics: there's no multiply operation. Good luck with 3d.

An old time trick was to replace multiply ops with adds that produce the same result because they are faster.