Author Topic: Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread  (Read 3167 times)

Joe Redifer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8178
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #15 on: October 06, 2006, 02:01:31 PM »
Screw Half Life 2.  It is soooo obsolete.  Half Life 6 is much better.  I can't settle for anything less.  That being said, I really like Hard Drivin' on the Genesis.  It is a true 3D game.

ParanoiaDragon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4619
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #16 on: October 06, 2006, 02:05:50 PM »
Anyone know what Faceball for PCE was using for the walls, or characters?  Sprites/tiles, or any poly's?

Black Tiger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11242
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #17 on: October 06, 2006, 02:16:54 PM »
Quote from: "ParanoiaDragon"
Anyone know what Faceball for PCE was using for the walls, or characters?  Sprites/tiles, or any poly's?


I'n no techy, but I remember it looking like vector/wire frame bg's with sprite's that could be animated/pre-rendered even if they weren't.
http://www.superpcenginegrafx.net/forum

Active and drama free PC Engine forum

GUTS

  • Guest
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #18 on: October 06, 2006, 04:10:33 PM »
F-22 Raptor on Genesis used polygons and did a decent job of it.

nodtveidt

  • Guest
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #19 on: October 06, 2006, 04:16:40 PM »
Hrm...just played Ranger-X for a few minutes, got into the second level before becoming bored. So far, there isn't squat here that hasn't already been done on the PCE and frankly, much of it better. The game controls like crap, honestly...also, the music is terrible, the sound effects are decent but a little underwhelming. The graphics are excellent but nothing out of the ordinary for the 16 bit era. I'm not seeing what the big deal is here...as far as I can tell, this is actually quite a boring game that accomplishes little that hasn't already been done before on the Genesis. The little dot-screen 3D stuff between level 1 and level 2 isn't all that interesting either, nor hard to make.

Very interesting parallax limitation on the first level...three layers, yet it only scrolls on one plane. Why? Because one of the planes is faked...there's only two hardware planes to play with, so the third one has to be faked, thus the scroll is limited in its movement. The second level uses a standard two-plane scroll which we all know the Genesis can handle without difficulty.

Could this be done on the PCE? Without question. It would be much easier on the SGX, but the PCE could more than handle this game. The parallax in places would have to be faked, of course.

So would I port it? No. This game is dull as hell, and I doubt I'll ever fire it up again, it's that boring.

Quote from: "GUTS"
F-22 Raptor on Genesis used polygons and did a decent job of it.

Are you sure you don't mean F-22 Interceptor? I can't find anything about F-22 Raptor having a Genesis port.

EDIT: Just checked out F-22 Interceptor. It definately uses polygons. The scene is extremely simple and the poly count is less than 50. There's absolutely no shading whatsoever, and the game only runs at about 10 fps max...barely playable. Lots of slowdown when there's too many polys. This is a perfect example of why the Genesis simply could not handle true 3D games...there simply wasn't enough CPU horsepower.

Emerald Rocker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 701
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #20 on: October 06, 2006, 04:24:46 PM »
Nah, the PCE couldn't do Ranger-X.  Levels 2 and 5 are beyond the PCE's capabilities.
Official member of the PCEFX 4K Post Club

nodtveidt

  • Guest
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #21 on: October 06, 2006, 04:25:49 PM »
Quote from: "Emerald Rocker"
Nah, the PCE couldn't do Ranger-X.  Levels 2 and 5 are beyond the PCE's capabilities.

Level 2 wasn't all that special.

LHX Attack Chopper appears to use the same, or a similar, engine as F-22 Interceptor.

Emerald Rocker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 701
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #22 on: October 06, 2006, 04:30:29 PM »
Yes it is.
Official member of the PCEFX 4K Post Club

nodtveidt

  • Guest
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #23 on: October 06, 2006, 04:31:54 PM »
If you say so.

Odonadon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 436
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #24 on: October 06, 2006, 04:36:45 PM »
Quote from: "Emerald Rocker"
Nah, the PCE couldn't do Ranger-X.  Levels 2 and 5 are beyond the PCE's capabilities.


Do you have anything to back this argument up, or are you content with the "It can't because I say so" position? :)

I gotta tell ya, nod's a pretty experienced programmer and if he says it can be done I sure believe him.  This argument will pretty much stop here if you are unable to produce something to backup your position.

OD
http://www.turbo2k.net - the truly Turboist of all Turbo sites.

Emerald Rocker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 701
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #25 on: October 06, 2006, 04:45:35 PM »
Well no, I really don't have anything to back it up.  But read his explanation again, and think about this:

You know how people talk about the cool special effects in Super Castlevania 4?  Well, those effects are in the second section of level 4.  If someone just plays level 3 and the first section of level 4, and then says "I see no special effects here", then how useful is that?

All the experience in the world doesn't help if you haven't even seen the game.
Official member of the PCEFX 4K Post Club

nodtveidt

  • Guest
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #26 on: October 06, 2006, 04:51:04 PM »
The parallax in level 2 of Ranger-X couldn't be 100% duplicated on the PCE because it only has a single plane. It would be braindead easy on the SGX but that's not the issue. Anyways, it could still be done on a lesser scale. It's one of those little details that would have to be altered if a port was made. Even as such, truly clever programmers could even work their way around that detail as well...a bit of BAT magic is all it would take. A lot of work for sure but could it be done? Probably, just maybe not 100% accurately.

Keranu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9054
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #27 on: October 06, 2006, 05:08:10 PM »
I've beaten Ranger X and loved it, but ersonally I think level 2 in Ranger X is one of the least impressive levels in the whole game. It doesn't use many colors at all, there is no "mega layered parallax scrolling", just two seperate plans, not much action going on, and that "3d effect" that GUTS was drooling over in the conversation was already done in games like Street Fighter II and  Strip Fighter as far as I can tell.

Nod just to fill you in on the rest of the game, the levels don't get any more action packed as the first level really. Level three gets pretty loaded with action, but it slowsdown and flickers a lot so I don't think it would be any worse on PCE. Level 3 also does some nice simple palette swapping, but we already know any console can handle that.
Quote from: Bonknuts
Adding PCE console specific layer on top of that, makes for an interesting challenge (no, not a reference to Ys II).

GUTS

  • Guest
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #28 on: October 06, 2006, 05:44:01 PM »
If you guys can't see how great Ranger X looks then I don't know what to say, maybe find another hobby?  Ranger X uses every graphical trick in the book and does it all through amazing programming.  If someone finds it boring is a matter of (bad) taste, but the graphics speak for themselves.

Also, I'd like to add Red Zone to the list of games that the PCE and SNES couldn't do.

Oh and Keranu, Notvied said that F-22 uses polygons so I win the argument about pre-rendered.

Emerald Rocker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 701
Ranger X: The Official Debate Thread
« Reply #29 on: October 06, 2006, 05:45:42 PM »
oh my brother, TESTIFY
Official member of the PCEFX 4K Post Club