Re: Newton, James Cook and the Archi.

In message <07e98e2d4f.Andrew@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
          newpostcentral@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:

> In message <4f2d87305eeditor@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>           Qercus editor <editor@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
> > In article <1191664773.226181.222870@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> >    David.Watts.RiscPC@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > wrote:
> >> On 6 Oct, 06:39, "Alex' A. Interrants" <ausserstor...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> >> > Well, so I'm still playing "Pirates" on the good old Commodore 64.
I
> >> > will never understand why people are advised to buy a new computer
for
> >> > gaming. Most of the best titles are *very* old. Or very undemanding
of
> >> > hardware.
> >> >
> >> > For me, good games are like good books. In old times it was easier
to
> >> > write games for computers by everybody because the computers was
much
> >> > simpler, wasn't it? And the publish market was also more open to
> >> > spend informations about computers "and the run".
> > 
> >> it's just as simple or even easier to create your own games these
days
> >> with there being lots of easy to learn languages and widely available
> >> toolkits.
> > 
> > Possibly not. Ask for help and some fool will butt in and castigate
you for
> > asking about BASIC instead of using C++. It *could* be as simple (or
easier)
> > with good (and free) editors and development such as AppBasic - but
you also
> > need to be surrounded by op****tunities to gee you along (like magazine
> > listings). Now if someone would like to write a series of articles on
how to
> > write your own (what sort of game do you want?) then that could run
alongside
> > our series on Assembler programming ...
> > 
> The sticking point all the time though is the graphics. Most people 
> aren't talented artists as well as being able to program so the 
> solution is either poor graphics or "buy a PC/Mac". Even TEK's 
> graphics had to use non-RISC OS hardware and software for certain 
> parts. It certainly showed how useful TopModel could be for games 
> development but if you want to animate 3D characters it's incredibly 
> tedious if at all possible to get decent results.
> 
> Composition is good for bulk processing images but you have to spend 
> time with the script language.
> 
> Personally I think BASIC is a brilliant way of an amateur writing a 
> freeware game and the only wall anybody will come up against is the 
> graphics. If there could be an investigation into how this could be 
> addressed *that* would make for an excellent Qercus article!

That's very right. We have a lot of tools on the Commodore 64 today. The
games from the early eightys was less in quality of graphics - not to
compare with the games developed today.

But I think, this fact doesn't just affected the graphics. It was also
still happen because of better editors and more informations (programm
listings, hints etc.) about the machine.

Editors aren't a bar for us. I'm very agree with StrongEd, Zap and other
tools. RISC OS is very good in this kind of software. In other parts
not.

-- 
To reply, replace "ausserstorfer@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" (=spam bin)
by bavariasound (AT) chiemgau-net (point) de             Venusberg
British groggy A7000+ running RISC OS 4.39 Adjust    Upper Bavaria