Author Topic: Final Fight PCE  (Read 5466 times)

Spector

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 208
Final Fight PCE
« on: June 01, 2009, 08:52:46 AM »
We'll never know for sure, but how good do you think a conversion of Final Fight would have been on the PC Engine if it had been released in, say, 1991? By that time, there were some 8Mb Hucards, so obviously it would have needed that anyway. With 8Mb to play with, could a decent conversion have been made like the SNES version, with one character and a level removed, plus no two-player option?
« Last Edit: June 01, 2009, 08:54:20 AM by Spector »
You've got to feel the thrill... of disgust!
The beauty... of obscenity!

Necromancer

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21374
Re: Final Fight PCE
« Reply #1 on: June 01, 2009, 09:21:49 AM »
Final Fight on the SNES was a 10mb cart, so I suppose an 8mb HuCard would've been missing even more stuff than the SNES version.  Maybe not though, as I'm just speaking out of my ass and don't know how SNES code efficiency compares to that of the PCE.

Anyway, in '91 it probably would've been cheaper and easier for it to be released as a CD-ROM2 title (or maybe one of the first Super CD-ROM2 titles).  In that case, it would be pretty similar to the Mega-CD version, though with better colors.
U.S. Collection: 98% complete    157/161 titles

CosMind

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
Re: Final Fight PCE
« Reply #2 on: June 01, 2009, 11:10:20 AM »
i think the best we can do is relate it to a comparison between sf2 on both systems.  both sf2 and final fight are from the same dev house.  both games originally ran on the same cps1 arcade hardware (respectively).  thinking along those lines would likely lead to a close imagination of how final fight might have turned out on the pc engine.

ccovell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2245
Re: Final Fight PCE
« Reply #3 on: June 01, 2009, 12:02:30 PM »
Final Fight on the SNES was a 10mb cart, so I suppose an 8mb HuCard would've been missing even more stuff than the SNES version.  Maybe not though, as I'm just speaking out of my ass...

Yep!

Because Final Fight was an 8 meg cart.  FF2 was 10 meg, however.

Black Tiger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11242
Re: Final Fight PCE
« Reply #4 on: June 01, 2009, 12:26:53 PM »
i think the best we can do is relate it to a comparison between sf2 on both systems.  both sf2 and final fight are from the same dev house.  both games originally ran on the same cps1 arcade hardware (respectively).  thinking along those lines would likely lead to a close imagination of how final fight might have turned out on the pc engine.

A better comparison would be Forgotten Worlds PCE. At the very least, a pixel for pixel (slightly cropped) static bg port maintaining most of the detail and great colors is possible. If someone who knows how to do animated tiles stepped in and helped, then some bg layering could be thrown in. It would help to cut down on flicker that there wouldn't be horizontal streams of bullets flying by and the AI could be told to keep down the number of horizontal enemies.
http://www.superpcenginegrafx.net/forum

Active and drama free PC Engine forum

Tatsujin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12311
Re: Final Fight PCE
« Reply #5 on: June 01, 2009, 01:06:53 PM »
on cd-rom, it would have looked better than the MD one (colorwise), but would have missed most of the parallax. the sound however was horrible anyway, so this could have been only an improvement.

anyway, if used the ACD, and i mean very well used, it would have been an awesome, even if a little late port.

i wished that SGFX port was true :cry: then also the parallax issue wouldn't have be an issue anymore.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2009, 01:08:48 PM by Tatsujin »
www.pcedaisakusen.net
the home of your individual PC Engine collection!!
PCE Games coundown: 690/737 (47 to go or 93.6% clear)
PCE Shmups countdown: 111/111 (all clear!!)
Sega does what Nintendon't, but only NEC does better than both together!^^

Black Tiger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11242
Re: Final Fight PCE
« Reply #6 on: June 01, 2009, 01:34:46 PM »
on cd-rom, it would have looked better than the MD one (colorwise), but would have missed most of the parallax.

Final Fight doesn't have much in the way of PCE-unfriendly parallax. Most of the backgrounds, if not entirely flat, are mostly or nearly all flat and the pockets of bg layering there are would be easy to pull off. Even the molten metal/flaming catwalk section would be easy to recreate 95% accurate.


Quote
i wished that SGFX port was true Crying or Very sad then also the parallax issue wouldn't have be an issue anymore.

Remember, a big reason the SuperGrafx failed was because the PCE was good enough. :wink:
http://www.superpcenginegrafx.net/forum

Active and drama free PC Engine forum

ceti alpha

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3836
Re: Final Fight PCE
« Reply #7 on: June 01, 2009, 02:10:24 PM »
Quote
Remember, a big reason the SuperGrafx failed was because the PCE was good enough. :wink:

Truer words hath never been spoken.  :wink:


"Let the CAW and Mystery of a Journey Unlike Any Other Begin"

Tatsujin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12311
Re: Final Fight PCE
« Reply #8 on: June 01, 2009, 02:15:58 PM »
on cd-rom, it would have looked better than the MD one (colorwise), but would have missed most of the parallax.

Final Fight doesn't have much in the way of PCE-unfriendly parallax. Most of the backgrounds, if not entirely flat, are mostly or nearly all flat and the pockets of bg layering there are would be easy to pull off. Even the molten metal/flaming catwalk section would be easy to recreate 95% accurate.

that's just not true. final fight had a lot of effective parallaxes (behind buildings, elevator, town) which couldn't have be done on the PCE and which just would not have looked OK if removing it.



Remember, a big reason the SuperGrafx failed was because the PCE was good enough. :wink:

in this case, the SGFX (and a 16~20mBit huey) would have been TEH hardware for.
www.pcedaisakusen.net
the home of your individual PC Engine collection!!
PCE Games coundown: 690/737 (47 to go or 93.6% clear)
PCE Shmups countdown: 111/111 (all clear!!)
Sega does what Nintendon't, but only NEC does better than both together!^^

Black Tiger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11242
Re: Final Fight PCE
« Reply #9 on: June 01, 2009, 03:10:25 PM »
on cd-rom, it would have looked better than the MD one (colorwise), but would have missed most of the parallax.

Final Fight doesn't have much in the way of PCE-unfriendly parallax. Most of the backgrounds, if not entirely flat, are mostly or nearly all flat and the pockets of bg layering there are would be easy to pull off. Even the molten metal/flaming catwalk section would be easy to recreate 95% accurate.

that's just not true. final fight had a lot of effective parallaxes (behind buildings, elevator, town) which couldn't have be done on the PCE and which just would not have looked OK if removing it.

I've looked over the game in the past to see what if anything might need to be sacrificed and I didn't see any background effects that couldn't be done using simple "tricks" that I'm aware of. If anything, it almost looks like Final Fight was designed with a future PCE port in mind parallax-wise and everthing has already been done in other PCE games (Riot Zone did that elevator effect, but also added moving gears :wink:).

To narrow it down, can you point out any sections with parallax that you think that the PCE couldn't do a version of?
http://www.superpcenginegrafx.net/forum

Active and drama free PC Engine forum

Tatsujin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12311
Re: Final Fight PCE
« Reply #10 on: June 01, 2009, 03:17:41 PM »
I've looked over the game in the past to see what if anything might need to be sacrificed and I didn't see any background effects that couldn't be done using simple "tricks" that I'm aware of. If anything, it almost looks like Final Fight was designed with a future PCE port in mind parallax-wise and everthing has already been done in other PCE games (Riot Zone did that elevator effect, but also added moving gears :wink:).

To narrow it down, can you point out any sections with parallax that you think that the PCE couldn't do a version of?

so show me your mighty tricks how to move the city behind buildings (1st lvl)? :) you see how well they did this in ninja gaiden e.g.
or in the park with trees, toilets, lamps, fence etc.? and as i said the elevator wouldn't be possible as it is in the AC, SFC, MCD..

and btw. that elevator effect in riot zone looks awfull!! as are the other used tricks in riot zone to pretend parallax or such (e.g. rain).
« Last Edit: June 01, 2009, 03:19:25 PM by Tatsujin »
www.pcedaisakusen.net
the home of your individual PC Engine collection!!
PCE Games coundown: 690/737 (47 to go or 93.6% clear)
PCE Shmups countdown: 111/111 (all clear!!)
Sega does what Nintendon't, but only NEC does better than both together!^^

Black Tiger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11242
Re: Final Fight PCE
« Reply #11 on: June 01, 2009, 06:57:43 PM »

so show me your mighty tricks how to move the city behind buildings (1st lvl)? :) you see how well they did this in ninja gaiden e.g.


This section would be the hardest to do from what I remember. We actually did see how well they did that Ninja Gaiden bg effect in all the other PCE games that did it correctly. It only stands out in Ninja Gaiden because it's broken. Pretty much every stage in Lords of Thunder does it and uses the same method as Ninja Gaiden. Even if the buildings were to become more repeated (if on SCD instead of ACD), as long as it's smooth it'd blend in well with the rest of the screen looking so faithful overall. Higher skyscraper tiles on the screen could use different upper section art, building off of shared lower tiles. There are also small sections of the arcade lacking parallax (like the far hallways of the final area) that the PCE port could add to with animated tiles.

Another possible way, but not the one I'd go with would be to have the upper portion of the bg slide horizontally, with sprites overlapping. The non-boss sections of are a good example of how much space sprites can cover a bg without noticeable flicker/breakup. I'd make the foreground garbage pile up higher in places and maybe add some other city distance art below the point where the taller buildings would scroll. Leading up to the buildings, the negative space between any new art could fade up into the buildings. The brown buildings could be shortened width-wise artistically if needed. Priority could be given for player sprites to flicker when characters jump at the top of the screen. Otherwise sprite bg sections would normally be above their heads. The invisible horizontal barrier where characters cannot walk above could be lowered a bit too. A variant of this method would require the HP bars, time, etc to either use strips of the bg/tiles or all sit above the play area. Again, I would do it with animated tiles (if I was ever anything but an armchair programmer :wink:), but many PCE games pull this off surprisingly well.


Quote
or in the park with trees, toilets, lamps, fence etc.? and as i said the elevator wouldn't be possible as it is in the AC, SFC, MCD..


The park sections would be the easiest to do, with the upper portion of the screen sliding along with the odd sprite overlapping. The point where the arcade begins to scroll the top section could be moved up and the difference could be filled with more grass and tile tree bases. Reducing the frequency/space between stuff like trees could help reduce potential flicker. In the waterside night section, the distant bg doesn't need to scroll until above everyone's heads, so sprite overlapping wouldn't even be necessary below, but lowering the invisible play area ceiling could minimize potential flicker from characters jumping up in front of trees.

In the sunset section, the foreground giant lamps can be done with sprites, as it's been done in so many PCE games already (they're nice and narrow until they're higher than anyone can jump). Aside from animated tiles for the fence, the whole bg below the horizon could be merged and the statue of liberty could move up a bit. The sky could then slide along with a sprite for the top of the statue of liberty. Again, even if the end result was some parallax, but less overall than the Sega-CD version, people would still love it more for the actual Forgotten Worlds-quality graphics/art.


Quote
and btw. that elevator effect in riot zone looks awfull!! as are the other used tricks in riot zone to pretend parallax or such (e.g. rain).


You may not love the art style, but that effect worked perfectly. I never said that Riot Zone was a good example of parallax otherwise. The Final Fight elevator could be done mostly with animated tiles above the floor which could just push upward. The sections where the orange girders that are seen through the floor pushing upward could be depicted with animating tiles that push up with the rest of the floor. Even if the distant third bg that quickly disappears wasn't included, it wouldn't be a big deal. But it could be kept as it is in the Sega-CD version (merged with the girders) by filling in the gaps of the floor and back railing with natural looking art and having the the railing downward push upward. Alternately, the floor could stay the same art-wise, with the holes color cycling in-between girders until the distant third bg art is passed, while the girder behind the floor holes sections could still animate or just remain orange. If this port was pixel for pixel like Forgotten Worlds, the sides would be cropped, so the taller side rails wouldn't need to be worried about.


A SCD version wouldn't be exactly the same, just as Forgotten Worlds wasn't (parallax aside). But like FW once you reach a certain level of faithfulness, people think they're looking at arcade-perfection anyway. It's easy now to compare different ports and arcade originals, but back in the day, people were blown away by much less than true 'arcade-perfectness'. A good example is the Sega-CD Final Fight which is heavily redrawn, but is considered by many to be perfect except for color. For a PCE Final Fight port, people would be pretty forgiving if a port of an often static bg arcade like Final Fight had some sections become completely static if the rest of the game was sprinkled with various forms of parallax.
http://www.superpcenginegrafx.net/forum

Active and drama free PC Engine forum

Necromancer

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21374
Re: Final Fight PCE
« Reply #12 on: June 02, 2009, 03:24:55 AM »
Yep!

Because Final Fight was an 8 meg cart.  FF2 was 10 meg, however.

Ah, craponastick!  Oops.  :oops:
U.S. Collection: 98% complete    157/161 titles

Black Tiger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11242
Re: Final Fight PCE
« Reply #13 on: June 02, 2009, 12:17:16 PM »
that's just not true. final fight had a lot of effective parallaxes (behind buildings, elevator, town) which couldn't have be done on the PCE and which just would not have looked OK if removing it.


Here's a single video clip taken from a real published PCE game that does all the parallax effects you mentioned (except the elevator which Riot Zone does), with a bonus third bg layer, cool transparencies, wavy effect and lots of animation-

http://superpcenginegrafx.com/video/x2boss1bgclip.avi
« Last Edit: June 02, 2009, 02:02:10 PM by Black Tiger »
http://www.superpcenginegrafx.net/forum

Active and drama free PC Engine forum

turbofan1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 190
Re: Final Fight PCE
« Reply #14 on: June 02, 2009, 01:01:41 PM »
that's just not true. final fight had a lot of effective parallaxes (behind buildings, elevator, town) which couldn't have be done on the PCE and which just would not have looked OK if removing it.


Here's a single video clip taken from a real published PCE game that does all the parallax effects you mentioned, with a bonus third bg layer, cool transparencies, wavy effect and lots of animation-

http://superpcenginegrafx.com/video/x2boss1bgclip.avi


Not that I have anything to add to this.What game is that btw?The Legend Of Xanadu?