Vampire Killer with Smooth scroll in Coleco

Page 3/4
1 | 2 | | 4

By hamlet

Scribe (2960)

hamlet's picture

16-01-2020, 12:12

The VICII has been an inhouse production from MOS, which was occupied by Commodore in the early 70s. C= had become the leader in 8bit circuit production at that time. The 6502 family was also sold to other companies but the special chips was what makes the C= product line. Funny, that the Amiga, long before C= bought the company, was also planned as an gaming console. Also I remember our AutoCAD system running two monitors as you mentioned.
This has of course nothing to do with the topic.
Pure sound fanatics use the line out from our OPL(L)s, so why not use a VGA output for better graphics? I remember the C128 and Atari also used different monitor outputs for different screen resolutions.
I do own a turboChameleon64 which is a FPGA based cartridge, which can work as a stand-alone C64 or can take total controll over the computer and degrades it to a keyboard console. Which makes a bad taste, when using it... At least for me.

By tfh

Prophet (2068)

tfh's picture

16-01-2020, 12:30

PingPong wrote:
tfh wrote:
PingPong wrote:

Problem with V9990 is philosophical : some msx people reject it because it lacks v99x8 compatibility. So it is perceived as a non msx thing.
But is is. The problem with V9990 is that there is no msx computer that has it in the main motherboard aside a v99x8.
But in the early days was common on pc to replace a cga with a ega. And no one complained that the pc would never be a pc.
So why we complain on msx?

Weird comparisation. Completely different architecture and way of working. Noone needed to hook-up a monitor to their CGA to boot up a program and then switch to the EGA screen. Lots of systems didn't even have integrated graphics. And if you'd have an MSX with a V9990 only, no MSX software would work on it.

MSX has an architecture in most ways similar to pc expecitally when we talk about expandibility.
About the additional monitor, you should know that in the early days MS-DOS programs were debugged with a sw called codeview that used TWO GRAPHICS CARDS and TWO MONITORS. There was also a Electrical CAD Engineering sw that used another Graphic card with another monitor to output the circuit schema and the standard CGA 80x25 display to interact with console command with the CAD Designer. Nothing strange here.
Obviously, the additional gfx card was not working without a sw that specifically drive it. Exactly like MSX.
Was done because of the SAME REASONS in msx. TO achieve a better display than built-in one.

Quote:
Quote:

V9990 is simple a new msx vdp originally created for msx.

Assumptions.
Or do you have any documents to support this statement? As far as I know, the only MSX links are the fact it's Yamaha and there is a proto board (also for PC & PC-Engine)

The evidence: if you look at the way the interface with the host machine is realized you clearly see that is done for MSX then adapted as a general purpose gfx card.

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:

Did you know that the C64 Vic II was created for arcade use then put in a C64?

No, I didn't. As far as I know it was developed by MOS (later part of Commodore Semiconductor) especially for the C64/128: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOS_Technology_VIC-II
Which arcade machines used the VIC II? I can't find any info on that.

Your informations are wrong. The VIC-II was originally intended as an arcade chip, but did not sell well. So when C64 come to light they tryed to recover the money by using on C64 itself.
It is because did not sell well as arcade chip that it is on c64, and it is also the reason there where no arcade machines based on VIC-II.

https://www.retro-game.it/la-storia-del-commodore-64/ is an italian site i quote the text here:

Quote:

Il design del Commodore 64 prende vita nel gennaio del 1981 quando gli ingegneri della Commodore MOS Technology decidono di realizzare un nuovo chip ad alte prestazioni grafiche e sonore per il mercato arcade. Nel novembre dello stesso anno, a chip ultimato, il presidente Commodore Jack Tramiel convertirà il progetto ad un uso casalingo implementando la nuova tecnologia in un computer da 64k.

Quote:

the c64 design came to light on jan 1981 when MOS Technology Engineering created a new gfx and sound chip for arcade businnes. ......

OT: the VIC-II chip was a good chip for home computers, but compared to arcade chips available at the time it was largely inferior, that's because commodore failed to sell it and recycled on C64.
Arcade machines of the era offered better gfx than the VIC-II could achieve.

I'm sorry, but there it to much nonsense in here to seriously respond to it. I'm gonna leave it at this, as we won't be getting nowhere :murdock:

By PingPong

Prophet (3501)

PingPong's picture

16-01-2020, 12:47

tfh wrote:
PingPong wrote:
tfh wrote:
PingPong wrote:

Problem with V9990 is philosophical : some msx people reject it because it lacks v99x8 compatibility. So it is perceived as a non msx thing.
But is is. The problem with V9990 is that there is no msx computer that has it in the main motherboard aside a v99x8.
But in the early days was common on pc to replace a cga with a ega. And no one complained that the pc would never be a pc.
So why we complain on msx?

Weird comparisation. Completely different architecture and way of working. Noone needed to hook-up a monitor to their CGA to boot up a program and then switch to the EGA screen. Lots of systems didn't even have integrated graphics. And if you'd have an MSX with a V9990 only, no MSX software would work on it.

MSX has an architecture in most ways similar to pc expecitally when we talk about expandibility.
About the additional monitor, you should know that in the early days MS-DOS programs were debugged with a sw called codeview that used TWO GRAPHICS CARDS and TWO MONITORS. There was also a Electrical CAD Engineering sw that used another Graphic card with another monitor to output the circuit schema and the standard CGA 80x25 display to interact with console command with the CAD Designer. Nothing strange here.
Obviously, the additional gfx card was not working without a sw that specifically drive it. Exactly like MSX.
Was done because of the SAME REASONS in msx. TO achieve a better display than built-in one.

Quote:
Quote:

V9990 is simple a new msx vdp originally created for msx.

Assumptions.
Or do you have any documents to support this statement? As far as I know, the only MSX links are the fact it's Yamaha and there is a proto board (also for PC & PC-Engine)

The evidence: if you look at the way the interface with the host machine is realized you clearly see that is done for MSX then adapted as a general purpose gfx card.

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:

Did you know that the C64 Vic II was created for arcade use then put in a C64?

No, I didn't. As far as I know it was developed by MOS (later part of Commodore Semiconductor) especially for the C64/128: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOS_Technology_VIC-II
Which arcade machines used the VIC II? I can't find any info on that.

Your informations are wrong. The VIC-II was originally intended as an arcade chip, but did not sell well. So when C64 come to light they tryed to recover the money by using on C64 itself.
It is because did not sell well as arcade chip that it is on c64, and it is also the reason there where no arcade machines based on VIC-II.

https://www.retro-game.it/la-storia-del-commodore-64/ is an italian site i quote the text here:

Quote:

Il design del Commodore 64 prende vita nel gennaio del 1981 quando gli ingegneri della Commodore MOS Technology decidono di realizzare un nuovo chip ad alte prestazioni grafiche e sonore per il mercato arcade. Nel novembre dello stesso anno, a chip ultimato, il presidente Commodore Jack Tramiel convertirà il progetto ad un uso casalingo implementando la nuova tecnologia in un computer da 64k.

Quote:

the c64 design came to light on jan 1981 when MOS Technology Engineering created a new gfx and sound chip for arcade businnes. ......

OT: the VIC-II chip was a good chip for home computers, but compared to arcade chips available at the time it was largely inferior, that's because commodore failed to sell it and recycled on C64.
Arcade machines of the era offered better gfx than the VIC-II could achieve.

I'm sorry, but there it to much nonsense in here to seriously respond to it. I'm gonna leave it at this, as we won't be getting nowhere :murdock:

Evidence is evidence. Not a matter ofsense

By mars2000you

Enlighted (5562)

mars2000you's picture

16-01-2020, 15:17

@tfh and pingpong: these verrrrrrrrry looooooooong quotes are horrible, please stop with that!

By tfh

Prophet (2068)

tfh's picture

16-01-2020, 15:47

mars2000you wrote:

@tfh and pingpong: these verrrrrrrrry looooooooong quotes are horrible, please stop with that!

No worries. As I said, I won't continue the discussion, so... Time for Running Naked in a Field of Flowers Running Naked in a Field of Flowers

By iamweasel2

Hero (549)

iamweasel2's picture

17-01-2020, 00:44

Rataplan wrote:

It looks like the Coleco merely serves as a PSU for the SGM2 with access to the joystick ports. While I really like the hardware and certainly the development, for me this has nothing to do with Coleco anymore. Putting a big GPU and a fast CPU on a card, you can do anything. But how is that still Coleco? It has no charm for me.

That is not correct. The coleco CPU still deals with the sound part and the joysticks, if I'm not mistaken. The new CPU inside SGM2 deals with the new VDP. It's an arrangement similar to the arcades of the 80s, where you had 2 or 3 CPUs working together. So the Coleco CPU still does something, it is not simply a PSU for the SGM2.

By iamweasel2

Hero (549)

iamweasel2's picture

17-01-2020, 00:49

gdx wrote:

The problem with SGM2 is that all the time used by Opcodes to develop this extension and specific games will not be used to develop Coleco games. The same remark can be made to the MSXVR.

The SGM1 was a better project because it improved the Coleco while adding part of the MSX and Adam.

I don't see how SGM1 is better than SGM2. SGM1 allows for MSX1 games that requires more RAM to run in Coleco. SGM2 allows for MSX2 and arcade games to run in Coleco. They seem to be the same to me, only that SGM2 is more powerful.

By Manuel

Ascended (16140)

Manuel's picture

17-01-2020, 23:27

SGM2 allows for MSX2 games? Are you sure about that? I didn't see that custom videochip in the SGM2 is compatible with V9938.

By ARTRAG

Enlighted (6333)

ARTRAG's picture

17-01-2020, 23:49

Sgm2 does not allow msx2 games to run on coleco. You should port msx2 games to SGM2 coding them from scratch, they do not share any HW component

By gdx

Prophet (3320)

gdx's picture

18-01-2020, 09:07

Quote:

I don't see how SGM1 is better than SGM2. SGM1 allows for MSX1 games that requires more RAM to run in Coleco. SGM2 allows for MSX2 and arcade games to run in Coleco. They seem to be the same to me, only that SGM2 is more powerful.

SGM2 doesn't allow to run MSX2 games. Technically SGM2 is more powerful than SGM1, yes but it is equivalent to another new system. There are many other systems more powerful than SGM2. If this is what I was looking for, I will no longer use MSX or Coleco.

There is an adapter for MSX to use NES cartridges. In reality it is not an adapter but just a device that uses the power supply from MSX. I also don't think it interesting. A new mini ADAM with one or two flash cards as drive + an SMG1 integrated would be much more interesting for me.

What I think would seem nasty to say that but SGMs seem to have been created mainly to sell games not to please users. It's just my opinion, and that doesn't avoid me from thinking that Opcodes is doing a fantastic job. This Castlevania is beautiful. I would not hesitate to buy it if it was made for MSX2 or even for Coleco.

Page 3/4
1 | 2 | | 4