| |
HCL
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 716 |
Screen limits
Once when i got myself a C= monitor, I made some tests to see what the actual limits were. Keeping in mind all the bugs i left in Royal Arte, after this i would never have to leave any visual bugs because of not seing them.
But now in EMU-age, the same horrible bugs appear again in many demos. Vice only shows 272 x 384 pixels, and people appearantly start to think that's the way to go. And it suxx big time!
So when i found my old screen tests yesterday, i thought maybe i should put this up here. I also had some info about sprite-limits in the borders. Let's get started.
Screen limits
-------------
Vertically:
First visible line: 8 (d012 = 8)
Last visible line: 12b (d012 = 2b)
That makes 292 visible lines totally.
Transfered to sprite positions we get..
spt-pos 12a: one line visible in lower border.
spt-pos 12b: one line visible in upper border.
Horizontally:
Left border: 48 visible pixels (6 chars).
Right border: 36 visible pixels (4.5 chars).
That makes 404 pixels, right.
Sprite bugs in left border:
All sprites invisible at positions 1f8-1ff.
spt7 invisible at pos <= 1ce.
spt8 invisivle at pos <= 1ee.
Sprite bugs in right border:
spt1 stretch bug at pos >= 14b.
spt2 stretch bug at pos >= 15b.
Bug above first line at pos => 163: spt 3,4,5.
Bug on last line at pos => 164: spt 3,4,5.
Ok. I think that's all. Does anyone have other specs? Please don't post if you have a lowsy TV-set, they always sukk. Did i get those sprite-bugs correctly? Sounds totally wierd :). And finally: DON'T RELEASE before you checked your demo against this spec >:E. |
|
... 103 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
JackAsser
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 1989 |
This might be obvious for many but I do think we should, atleast for comformance, tell the reader that this spec goes for PAL C=, not NTSC. =) |
| |
Radiant
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 639 |
Perhaps this should also be forwarded to the VICE team, or do they have some super ultra cool reason for not showing the entire border area? |
| |
Graham
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 990 |
@HCL: Not quite right. In the left border there are only 5.75 chars visible (46 pixels). The two "missing" pixels are always white on VIC-II, and on TED they are highest luminance. Also the number of visible lines differ from monitor to monitor. Some would enable display earlier than others. |
| |
WVL
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 886 |
I should look up the measurements i did for the first and last visible rasterline on Real Thing (tm) (well, my monitor), Vice and CCS64..
for some part i wanted to be sure i would be using the complete height of the screen on both the real thing and emu...
I'll look it up :).. btw, the differences were huge! :) |
| |
Graham
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 990 |
@radiantx: I don't think that it makes sense to display the entire area. You will see a lot of border bugs which are normally invisible + most Vice users are gamers and not developers.
I still wonder: Most people in the scene have 1084, CM8833 or CM8833-II monitors. Why don't you coders use the screen adjustments to look into the borders? |
| |
HCL
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 716 |
..yes, why don't you >:).. I always have my monitor ajusted to the smallest size -> largest possible borders visible. I mean, who cares about the char screen anyways, it's the borders that count ;).
However, not even Graham himself is perfect. Just check Coma Job.. Horrible sideborder bugs, eventhough *some* are avoided. ;) |
| |
Radiant
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 639 |
Ok, silly n00b question: Does the 1901 show the same area as these other monitors? I did fix one border bug in The Works after looking at it on my monitor (and that's how I learned VICE doesn't show the entire screen, grr!). I suspect the twister in Blueprint looks ugly in the upper border for this reason, but I haven't really watched that shite since getting the monitor. |
| |
Radiant
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 639 |
@Graham: However, they (the VICE team) do strive towards emulation accuracy, do they not?
Also it may be true that most casual users are gamers, but I think the hardcore (and bug reporting!) user crowd consists mainly of sceners and other technically oriented people. I really can't see any reason for not having as good emulation as possible... If there are border bugs, they should be shown, IMO. |
| |
Ninja
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 404 |
I would really appreciate it, if an emulator had an adjustable visible area. I'd suggest having three options:
Standard = as emus have it now
Extended = set to HCL's numbers above
User-defined (<3) = show that what I want to be shown, be it lines 0-312 (yes, I mean it) or whatever...
At least the VICE developers were thinking about it (http://www.vicekb.de.vu/00-010), but well... |
| |
WVL
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 886 |
ppl can also use the HOXS emulator. I have it installed and it seems to be much better w0king than vice. This emu shows a lot more of the borders!!
But it's not as nice to work with as vice is (ie, no carts, no other nice tricks etc). So i only rarely use it to take a peep in the extreme borders.
Also, i remember Jackasser telling me he was working on his own VICE version with bigger borders.
btw, does anyone know if VICE/CCS do things like collision detection correctly in the parts of the screen they do not show? |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 - Next |
