| |
Starfighter 3000 Iyonix version |
| |
This is a long thread. Click here to view the threaded list. |
| |
|
Steven Gregory |
Message #116976, posted by thecellartroll at 09:34, 22/3/2011 |
Member
Posts: 135
|
The Starfighter wikipedia page claims that;
"There is an additional little-known version that was in development for the Iyonix PC that featured all the enhancements of the 3DO version programmed by the authors of the original Acorn Archimedes machine for use with RISC OS 6. It was to be bundled with every new Iyonix PC sold. However, the deal fell through and the game was never officially released. It was later made available through APDL (Acorn Public Domain Library) magazine, the full version bundled free with one of its issues."
Is this true and is this version different/better than version 3.14 (which is bloody excellent I have to say!). If the legend is true then how do I go about obtaining the golden article?
**EDIT: It turns out that the above is NOT true and is Wikipedia mancowdropping; read further down for details**
[Edited by thecellartroll at 17:11, 3/4/2011] |
| |
 [ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Michael Drake |
Message #116977, posted by tlsa at 10:00, 22/3/2011, in reply to message #116976 |
Posts: 1097
|
The deal was for the Omega, not the Iyonix, iirc. I think it was eventually released with the RISC World magazine.
I think the version you already have is the best. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #116978, posted by Phlamethrower at 10:49, 22/3/2011, in reply to message #116977 |
 Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
The deal was for the Omega, not the Iyonix, iirc. Correct. Once the Omega flopped it was then tidied up and released for the Iyonix instead.
I think the version you already have is the best. Also correct. The 3DO version was quite a different beast to the Arc version. Although the texture-mapped hills and ships were a bonus, I'm fairly certain the game had a very short draw range, with most of the scenery hidden by fog. No clear views of the horizon like on the Arc version. The gameplay had also been changed around a bit; the shop had been removed, and instead all ship upgrades were made by collecting bonus items.
Apart from the shortcomings of being based around the 3DO version, I'm fairly certain the Iyonix port (released as "Star Fighter 3000: TNG") also suffered from a poor framerate, although a quick scan through drobe's review doesn't reveal any mention of it. There's also this thread here with a little bit more background to the release. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Trevor Johnson |
Message #116979, posted by trevj at 11:06, 22/3/2011, in reply to message #116976 |
Member
Posts: 660
|
The Starfighter wikipedia page claims that [...] If anyone fancies adding some references to the article, that'd be great. Just a list of sources on the talk page would be a starting point. (I know the article's rated as being of Low importance, but it at least does run on the newer hardware.) |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Steven Gregory |
Message #116980, posted by thecellartroll at 11:39, 22/3/2011, in reply to message #116978 |
Member
Posts: 135
|
Thanks for the clarification folks.
I actually have the 3do version. It is quite nice, but I'd rather they had just made a graphically superior conversion rather than changing the way upgrades work etc. Mind you the FreeDO emulator doesn't help!
When I read that, I just thought it would be interesting to see it after it got ported back. I shall order up a copy of that Risc World volume when I have some spare money in my Paypal account  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Peter Howkins |
Message #116981, posted by flibble at 11:40, 22/3/2011, in reply to message #116980 |
Posts: 892
|
Thanks for the clarification folks.
I actually have the 3do version. It is quite nice, but I'd rather they had just made a graphically superior conversion rather than changing the way upgrades work etc. Mind you the FreeDO emulator doesn't help!
When I read that, I just thought it would be interesting to see it after it got ported back. I shall order up a copy of that Risc World volume when I have some spare money in my Paypal account Please be aware that load and save game doesn't work in the Risc World backport of the 3DO version, as such you have to start from scratch every game ... |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Steven Gregory |
Message #116982, posted by thecellartroll at 12:07, 22/3/2011, in reply to message #116981 |
Member
Posts: 135
|
Please be aware that load and save game doesn't work in the Risc World backport of the 3DO version, as such you have to start from scratch every game ...
Yes, that could be annoying! But not to worry, mainly I just want a play for curiosity's sake.
Maybe we need a way to save the emulator state in RPCemu...
[Edited by thecellartroll at 12:08, 22/3/2011] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Nathan |
Message #117092, posted by Wrath at 20:10, 1/4/2011, in reply to message #116976 |
Member
Posts: 155
|
The Starfighter wikipedia page claims that;
"There is an additional little-known version that was in development for the Iyonix PC that featured all the enhancements of the 3DO version programmed by the authors of the original Acorn Archimedes machine for use with RISC OS 6. It was to be bundled with every new Iyonix PC sold. However, the deal fell through and the game was never officially released. It was later made available through APDL (Acorn Public Domain Library) magazine, the full version bundled free with one of its issues."
Is this true and is this version different/better than version 3.14 (which is bloody excellent I have to say!). If the legend is true then how do I go about obtaining the golden article? No this is not true. It was never intended to be made for the Iyonix and no deal or negotiation was ever started with Castle.
The conversion was already started when VOTI left the scene, hence the new name of FlaYmz to make it a separate entity. We did have many problems with the conversion as a lot of the 3D0 hardware, that we had to copy, was and is patented. Most of the game was completed when I eventually left the scene and I think Lee did some extra bits just to get it out the door.
Sadly this meant it wasn't as polished as I'd have liked it to be but if the market had stayed steady or increased, we would have put the finishing touches to it.
While I remember, and I'm not sure if I ever released this information, just before Acorn went bye-bye, I had tempted Andrew Hutchings (Fednet) to start coding a new game which would have been a new Stuntracer. Unfortunately Acorn went sour and Andrew felt burnt after I had promised so much (largely because I was promised a lot by Acorn). I still have some of the early code he did somewhere....I still feel incredibly guilty about it although it was not in my control. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #117093, posted by filecore at 20:59, 1/4/2011, in reply to message #117092 |
Posts: 3868
|
"It was later made available through APDL (Acorn Public Domain Library) magazine..." No this is not true.
Wikipedia is errors on top of errors when it comes to RISC OS - the main problem seeming to be sources, when some stalwart Wikipedian cuts and paste a piece of misinformation and the only correction source is "I was the original author", which is met with disbelief and derision.
For what it's worth, APDL stands for Archimedes Public Domain Library, not Acorn Public Domain Library
EDIT: mismatched italics tags
[Edited by filecore at 22:00, 1/4/2011] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Steven Gregory |
Message #117116, posted by thecellartroll at 16:14, 3/4/2011, in reply to message #117092 |
Member
Posts: 135
|
No this is not true. It was never intended to be made for the Iyonix and no deal or negotiation was ever started with Castle.
Thanks for the information. It is always interesting to hear what goes on in the slightly confusing quest to keep ** RISC OS ** alive!
I apologise for reposting the nonsense and have edited the original post for the sake of future googlers.
[Edited by thecellartroll at 19:42, 3/4/2011] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #117117, posted by filecore at 17:12, 3/4/2011, in reply to message #117116 |
Posts: 3868
|
keep RiscOS alive *cough* Then call it "RISC OS" (two acronyms seperated by a space), not RiscOS, RISCOS, Riscos, RISC/OS, RISC/os, Risc/os, or anything else. That way you'll appease the angry pseudoadvocates. And for heaven's sake, don't make this mistake over on CSAM unless you're wearing a flame-retardant (and, possibly, a retard-retardant) suit  *cough*
I apologise for reposting the nonsense and have edited the original post for the sake of future googlers. This is for the benefit of lazy future searchers who suffer from TL;DR and don't bother reading to the end of the thread? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Blind Moose |
Message #117118, posted by Acornut at 18:03, 3/4/2011, in reply to message #117117 |
 No-eye-deer (No Idea)
Posts: 487
|
Is RISC OS OK?
Aha! a Netsurf edit required.
[Edited by Acornut at 20:49, 3/4/2011] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #117119, posted by filecore at 18:40, 3/4/2011, in reply to message #117118 |
Posts: 3868
|
Is RISC OS OK? Possibly, but be careful to make sure you type a half-space when writing out the proper name of the  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Steven Gregory |
Message #117120, posted by thecellartroll at 18:45, 3/4/2011, in reply to message #117119 |
Member
Posts: 135
|
Gah. Another post edited... |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Martin Wilson |
Message #117121, posted by bonzobanana at 20:26, 3/4/2011, in reply to message #117120 |
Member
Posts: 16
|
I'd just like to comment that 3DO starfighter was superb with a long view distance just like the acorn version. I still have a 3do console and play it occasionally. Agree that the powerup system wasn't as good though.
It was the saturn and playstation versions that introduced fogging and clipping to keep up the frame rates. They were awful in comparison the amazing 3DO game. Somehow even with only a 12mhz arm processor the 3DO punched above its weight. Need for speed was also much better than psx/saturn versions and Wing Commander 3 was much better than the psx version. I believe the 3DO did have a sophisticated gpu for its time. Also the 3DO version was 640x480 a higher resolution than the psx/saturn versions of starfighter. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Steven Gregory |
Message #117123, posted by thecellartroll at 20:35, 3/4/2011, in reply to message #117121 |
Member
Posts: 135
|
I'd just like to comment that 3DO starfighter was superb with a long view distance just like the acorn version. I still have a 3do console and play it occasionally. Agree that the powerup system wasn't as good though.
It was the saturn and playstation versions that introduced fogging and clipping to keep up the frame rates. They were awful in comparison the amazing 3DO game. Somehow even with only a 12mhz arm processor the 3DO punched above its weight. Need for speed was also much better than psx/saturn versions and Wing Commander 3 was much better than the psx version. I believe the 3DO did have a sophisticated gpu for its time. Also the 3DO version was 640x480 a higher resolution than the psx/saturn versions of starfighter. The above is all true. Unfortunately I haven't managed to add a real 3DO to the collection and the emulator is pretty quirky, but the 3DO version is miles ahead of the PS1 version (which I also have!) or the PC version which by the looks of the demo is identical to the PS1 job.
Maybe its time for an Android port of the original. I'd buy it  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Andrew |
Message #118422, posted by andrew at 14:14, 5/8/2011, in reply to message #117123 |
 Handbag Boi
Posts: 3439
|
Has anybody tried SF:TNG on an ARMini? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Peter Howkins |
Message #118423, posted by flibble at 14:20, 5/8/2011, in reply to message #118422 |
Posts: 892
|
Has anybody tried SF:TNG on an ARMini? No, because it's not 32bit compatible. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Trevor Johnson |
Message #118424, posted by trevj at 16:56, 5/8/2011, in reply to message #118423 |
Member
Posts: 660
|
No, because it's not 32bit compatible. Really? Martin, can you shed a little light on this?
[Edited by trevj at 17:57, 5/8/2011] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Andrew Rawnsley |
Message #118426, posted by arawnsley at 19:32, 5/8/2011, in reply to message #118424 |
R-Comp chap
Posts: 600
|
(please ignore this post - I didn't properly read Trevor's link)
But remember that SF3K and SF:TNG are very different, with different coders AFAIK.
[Edited by arawnsley at 20:33, 5/8/2011] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Trevor Johnson |
Message #118427, posted by trevj at 06:26, 6/8/2011, in reply to message #118426 |
Member
Posts: 660
|
Martin, can you shed a little light on this? [...] with different coders AFAIK.
Hmmm. Leo/Nathan? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Andrew |
Message #118429, posted by andrew at 12:13, 6/8/2011, in reply to message #118423 |
Handbag Boi
Posts: 3439
|
Has anybody tried SF:TNG on an ARMini? No, because it's not 32bit compatible.
Sorry I don't follow. SF:TNG is 32-bit compatible because it works on the Iyonix. What is the ARMini - 64bit? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Steven Gregory |
Message #118430, posted by thecellartroll at 14:47, 7/8/2011, in reply to message #118429 |
Member
Posts: 135
|
Sorry I don't follow. SF:TNG is 32-bit compatible because it works on the Iyonix. What is the ARMini - 64bit?
SF:TNG needs the SharedSound module which is available on the Iyonix but not on beagleboard etc as far as I'm aware. I think there are licensing issues preventing it being included. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Andrew Rawnsley |
Message #118431, posted by arawnsley at 15:45, 7/8/2011, in reply to message #118430 |
R-Comp chap
Posts: 600
|
I'll look into that. AFAIK SharedSound was done by Andy Pierson who I used to work with (eg. PC Sound Pro). I'd be surprised if there was no SharedSound, since it is a fairly vital bit of tech, but it *is* possible... |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Steven Gregory |
Message #118432, posted by thecellartroll at 16:28, 7/8/2011, in reply to message #118431 |
Member
Posts: 135
|
https://www.riscosopen.org/forum/forums/2/topics/336
As discussed on the ROOL site. Looks like it was going to happen but hasn't happened yet for some reason.
If the licensing status of the module is shaky its probably better that new software doesn't depend on it anyway. Shame about the loss of compatibility with older software but trying to maintain the use of twenty year old software is probably more a hindrance than a help to attempts to revive RISC OS.
[Edited by thecellartroll at 20:47, 7/8/2011] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Trevor Johnson |
Message #118433, posted by trevj at 19:19, 7/8/2011, in reply to message #118432 |
Member
Posts: 660
|
Shame about the loss of compatibility with older software but trying to maintain the use of twenty year old software is probably more a hindrance than a help to attempts to revive RISC OS. I think we should expect some clarification from ROOL by the time of the London show, i.e. is this issue worth holding out for, or is it best forgotten as you suggest.
[Edited by trevj at 23:14, 7/8/2011] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
qUE |
Message #118434, posted by qUE at 10:47, 8/8/2011, in reply to message #118433 |
Posts: 187
|
Shame about the loss of compatibility with older software but trying to maintain the use of twenty year old software is probably more a hindrance than a help to attempts to revive RISC OS. I think we should expect some clarification from ROOL by the time of the London show, i.e. is this issue worth holding out for, or is it best forgotten as you suggest.
[Edited by trevj at 23:14, 7/8/2011]
I think it'd be foolish to write off such a large back catalogue of legacy software when the amount of new software being released is so sparse. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Steffen Huber |
Message #118435, posted by hubersn at 12:33, 8/8/2011, in reply to message #118432 |
Member
Posts: 91
|
https://www.riscosopen.org/forum/forums/2/topics/336
As discussed on the ROOL site. Looks like it was going to happen but hasn't happened yet for some reason.
If the licensing status of the module is shaky its probably better that new software doesn't depend on it anyway. Shame about the loss of compatibility with older software but trying to maintain the use of twenty year old software is probably more a hindrance than a help to attempts to revive RISC OS.
SharedSound provides IMHO indispensable features. It is absolutely necessary that this module is available across the various versions of RISC OS. If we really have licence problems here, I would suggest an API-compatible rewrite. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Andrew Rawnsley |
Message #118436, posted by arawnsley at 14:33, 8/8/2011, in reply to message #118435 |
R-Comp chap
Posts: 600
|
Don't worry, now that I'm aware there is a problem - I won't let it be put out to pasture! |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Steven Gregory |
Message #118437, posted by thecellartroll at 17:57, 8/8/2011, in reply to message #118436 |
Member
Posts: 135
|
It can't be that important if the only bloke flogging RISC OS dedicated hardware didn't notice its absence.
I suspect those writing new software have just made their own code to compensate. I only pestered on the ROOL forum because I quite fancied seeing SF: TNG run on the beagleboard!
By the way, it runs at a playable speed on a StrongARM RiscPC once its had the turbo mod. I had to disable the intro video to get it to run, though and the game plays in a very odd screenmode. It would be nice if someone hacked it to be more LCD friendly |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
| Pages (2): 1
> >|
|
