Moderator: Moderators
Excuse me? Is a homebrew game and you are talking about the work of other people , a bit more of respect will be apreciated.Espozo wrote:If the gameplay is as lackluster as the title and the artwork I've seen, then I think I might stay away.
I don't think Espozo meant any disrespected here, just stated his opinion. I also think sik got tierdkp64 wrote:Excuse me? Is a homebrew game and you are talking about the work of other people , a bit more of respect will be apreciated.Espozo wrote:If the gameplay is as lackluster as the title and the artwork I've seen, then I think I might stay away.
Also , in my opinion , It looks really good , a lovely well made homebrew platformer
I wouldn't say 68k so much, as just a processor that's not Accumulator based. But stuff like that wreaks of macros. Yeah, they might be slow, but lets be honest here - 65x source code gets a bit too expanded and affects the readability. Macros clean this up and make things easily readable/understandable/compact/etc, as well as some other benefits. They waste a little space and waste some cycles, but if the code is in a non critical area - then no harm no foul. I mean, if the example you posted only represents about 0.1% cycle usage per frame - then does it really matter? I would be more concerned with how they optimize high level stuff to function faster on the processor's design (the organization/layout of data, how it can be accessed, etc); how it can be tailored or tweaked to function faster on this specific ISA. As a developer, I'd probably only start cycle counting on code/loops/etc that have a real impact.psycopathicteen wrote:I was bored yesterday night so started the "ASM optimizations" page on wiki.superfamicom.org, and went nuts ranting about programmers who write 65816 code, like they're writing 68000 microcode.
Well, not all homebrew games are good.kp64 wrote:Excuse me? Is a homebrew game
While I agree that there are more constructive ways to give feedback, sometimes we do dislike things in a more intense way, and feel the need to express that more harshly. Everything is someone's work, does that mean we can never pull an "Angry Video Game Nerd"?and you are talking about the work of other people , a bit more of respect will be apreciated.
My personal opinion is that it's a very well programmed game, it's very solid at the technical level, but the gameplay isn't particularly exciting, and the art... well, it looks like "programmer art" most of the time (very simplistic and lacking a consistent style).Also , in my opinion , It looks really good , a lovely well made homebrew platformer
Portal had N64-caliber graphics before it got picked up by Valve. Sometimes you have to prove the concept before you can hire artists.tokumaru wrote:and the art... well, it looks like "programmer art" most of the time (very simplistic and lacking a consistent style).
Off course I am. Even shitty LJN video games were made by people. (As in not by something like aliens or chimpanzees.kp64 wrote:you are talking about the work of other people
) The thing is, you shouldn't always be all lovey-dovey with people if you see flaws in their work because frankly, you're lying by telling them that their work doesn't need improvement. 
I think any sensible/respectable person can understand that their work is necessarily going to be 100% perfect, especially without any insight as to what is wrong. I agree 100%. I feel like one of the main problems with homebrew games is the artwork. (You certainty won't see anything Metal Slug quality.) I feel like that maybe with homebrew projects, people should work together more often in order to bounce ideas off each other and help each other to make a more commercial-quality games.tokumaru wrote:My personal opinion is that it's a very well programmed game, it's very solid at the technical level, but the gameplay isn't particularly exciting, and the art... well, it looks like "programmer art" most of the time (very simplistic and lacking a consistent style).
...and by "no optimizations", you mean "no intentional optimizations" because programmers were so used to programming the 68000, they make tons of optimizations without actually thinking about it. Kind've like how I'm so used to programming the 65816, I don't even have to think about optimization when I'm writing code.In my opinion, this is where the real difference lays between the 68k and the 65x ISA. While you can theoretically highly optimize both, the median performance of average code will almost always perform better on the 68k; you get really nice performance for no optimization.
