> >I have 6 sprites per line left, and 20 in total (others are for border
> >cloacking). Only BUT is that only very few 'fences' per screen can be
> >created. And it requires some extra calculations. But it is indeed a good
> >idea, since it doesn't need extra (slow) copying.
>
> wasting 2 sprites for borders indicated you want to smooth scroll.. WHY
> smooth scroll ! sd-sn didn't too .. does sd-sn. suck ? :)
> You waste lotsa vdp speed with this, better use 8x8 'scroll' and have more
> vdp power left for characters running around.. etc.
Smooth scrolling is the entire idea of my engine. If there was no smooth
scrolling I wouldn't have made the engine!
If smooth scrolling is possible (and it is), then why not? It looks much,
much better.
And when looking at the speed, SD-Snatcher sucks, yes. Bad example. Ys II
has a good engine, very fast and multilayer... That's a good example.
> By the way, would somebody have objections against an engine based on
16x16
> >tiles??? (that would make my engine faster and I then won't have to make
a
> >nifty workaround for the current speed problem I have).
>
> a top-view game like Bastard could be 16x16.. a bird-view rpg is better
> when using 8x8... more detailed editing.. (less gfx in ram too).
I'll try to keep it 8x8 then...
I had to make up my mind...
~Grauw
--
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
email me: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or ICQ: 10196372
visit my homepage at http://grauw.blehq.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
****
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and put "unsubscribe msx [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the quotes) in
the body (not the subject) of the message.
Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More information on MSX can be found in the following places:
The MSX faq: http://www.faq.msxnet.org/
The MSX newsgroup: comp.sys.msx
The MSX IRC channel: #MSX on Undernet
****
