65 replies to this topic

[T2KFREEKER]

Punisher5.0, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 12:22 PM, said:

CyranoJ, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 6:38 AM, said:

This coming from someone who can't even manage to work out how someone else's "Hello World" program works.... Clearly you are qualified to make that judgement call

You know what? Forget it, it's clear you are only in this thread (forum?) to troll. I ain't feeding you, I'd rather be productive and make some games instead.

I have never considered JagChris a troll or accused him of trolling. I thought he brought up a valid counter point.

I was gonna say . . .

Of all the people accused of Trolling, Jagchris should be the last one as he is one of the few that kept the Jaguar section over here alive until the current resurgence. He did help make my point though. A dedicated console does things differently than a PC because a PC is running a bunch of other routines whereas a dedicated console is just that, dedicated to games. Trying to say that a home console can't run a game because it doesn't have the same specifications as a PC makes no sense. If anything, I would be more inclined to believe that a person who claims that might be trolling, as it were, especially when they "KNOW" due to the fact that they are a programmer, that the two are apples and oranges in the first place. Not saying that is the case in point, but just what could have been.

[Austin]

JagChris, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 3:33 AM, said:

Its a damn shame with the hefty memory requirements the Jag isnt able to do a version of Robinsons Requiem.

Oh wait...

This example is exactly why I doubt System Shock would be doable in a worthwhile manner. Doable, maybe, but a doable that's worthwhile? I think that should be the question here. The system requirements for Robinson's are less, and there is clearly less going on in the game, yet it still runs rather choppy considering the basic environments it has. Perhaps Robinson's could have been done better, but using that as an example, I'd hate to see how System Shock would run.

Edited by Austin, Sat Sep 3, 2011 3:01 PM.

[Willard]

Austin, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 3:01 PM, said:

This example is exactly why I doubt System Shock would be doable in a worthwhile manner. Doable, maybe, but a doable that's worthwhile? I think that should be the question here. The system requirements for Robinson's are less, and there is clearly less going on in the game, yet it still runs rather choppy considering the basic environments it has. Perhaps Robinson's could have been done better, but using that as an example, I'd hate to see how System Shock would run.

But if PSW asked if this game was doable in a worthwhile manner, the answer would have been "no," and the question he actually wanted to ask would never have been answered.

Edited by Willard, Sat Sep 3, 2011 4:10 PM.

[sh3-rg]

Punisher5.0, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 12:22 PM, said:

I have never considered JagChris a troll or accused him of trolling. I thought he brought up a valid counter point.

He's not a troll at all, guilty only of being over-enthusiastic when it comes to the Jaguar and probably lacking a meaningful understanding of the machine and its capabilities when it comes to these types of discussions. TBF, I'd rather someone like that post for honest, genuine and what they think are positive reasons (however pointless these what if/could the jaguar do/etc posts) than the try-hard shit-stirring earlier by Jag Slave.

As for Chris' 'valid counter point', really it wasn't all that valid as he only considered memory requirements in his statement, probably one of the least relevant requirements considering the PC has a lot of other crap bloating that anyway. The big difference in the game he chose to prove his point would be 386SX vs 486DX2... if anyone remembers upgrading through that path they're sure to be aware of the huge gulf in performance there. Now look at RR on the Jaguar, not particularly stunning. So no, that proves nothing other than taking a 386sx PC game to the Jaguar has proved to be possible in the past but even then at a cost to game performance.

The whole minimum-PC-requirements to prove X/Y/Z thing is obviously a bit iffy but is a quick way to gain an idea of what the original game entails and required at the time when originally created by a team of professionals. Of course, if you were attempting to recreate some old PC game again for the Jaguar, it'd be a ground-up remake not a port. The way you'd go about a lot of things would have to be very different... and you'd be wasting time doing something utterly boring, pointless and possibly illegal, but that's for another discussion.

To be fair to CJ, in the case of System Shock, the minimum suggested PC requirements do give a quick impression of just why the Jaguar isn't really going to be a suitable platform for the game without making fairly drastic compromises and alterations. It's probably possible to make an approximation of the game for the jaguar. It'd be a much worse experience than the PC game that already exists. It'd probably take a small team a significant amount of time even as a day job.

So then, the real problem with threads like this is they serve no purpose other than to cause people to disagree with each other over something that will never happen and probably not that many people even want to happen. So what's the fucking point? If you absolutely must have a thread like this, make it a poll with three options and no comments allowed:

1. YES
2. NO
3. PLEASE STOP MAKING THREADS LIKE THIS, THEY SUCK AND DO MORE HARM THAN GOOD!

[sh3-rg]

Willard, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 3:31 PM, said:

Austin, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 3:01 PM, said:

This example is exactly why I doubt System Shock would be doable in a worthwhile manner. Doable, maybe, but a doable that's worthwhile? I think that should be the question here. The system requirements for Robinson's are less, and there is clearly less going on in the game, yet it still runs rather choppy considering the basic environments it has. Perhaps Robinson's could have been done better, but using that as an example, I'd hate to see how System Shock would run.

But if PSW asked if this game was doable in a worthwhile manner, the answer would have been "no," and the question he actually wanted to ask would never have been answered.

Your petty semantics add nothing to the discussion, if all posts were like yours nothing would ever be answered, there would just be a load of smug, self-satisfied pontificating...

[T2KFREEKER]

Austin, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 3:01 PM, said:

JagChris, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 3:33 AM, said:

Its a damn shame with the hefty memory requirements the Jag isnt able to do a version of Robinsons Requiem.

Oh wait...

This example is exactly why I doubt System Shock would be doable in a worthwhile manner. Doable, maybe, but a doable that's worthwhile? I think that should be the question here. The system requirements for Robinson's are less, and there is clearly less going on in the game, yet it still runs rather choppy considering the basic environments it has. Perhaps Robinson's could have been done better, but using that as an example, I'd hate to see how System Shock would run.

Okay, but wasn't Robinson's Requiem running full on texture mapped polygons? Plus the fact that there was absolutely no help at all for the developers from Atari what so ever. The point I am trying to make here is that under the most ideal of circumstances, the game actually could have ran much better. I.E. had Atari given third party developers more support as well as a mixing of Gouraud Shaded levels with parts of it texture mapped, especially since the GS was more of what the Jaguar was designed to do. IWAR is a great example of what I am talking about. The game implements both Texture mapping as well as Gouraud Shading and the game looks very good and is smooth as silk. With so much more information out there on the Jaguar and programming, say someone was serious about doing System Shock, it seems to me that it would be more feasible to do now than it was then. Just saying. I could be wrong though.

[Willard]

sh3-rg, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 4:28 PM, said:

Willard, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 3:31 PM, said:

Austin, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 3:01 PM, said:

This example is exactly why I doubt System Shock would be doable in a worthwhile manner. Doable, maybe, but a doable that's worthwhile? I think that should be the question here. The system requirements for Robinson's are less, and there is clearly less going on in the game, yet it still runs rather choppy considering the basic environments it has. Perhaps Robinson's could have been done better, but using that as an example, I'd hate to see how System Shock would run.

But if PSW asked if this game was doable in a worthwhile manner, the answer would have been "no," and the question he actually wanted to ask would never have been answered.

Your petty semantics add nothing to the discussion, if all posts were like yours nothing would ever be answered, there would just be a load of smug, self-satisfied pontificating...

I think you got that a little backward

[CyranoJ]

The original question was:

Quote

It struck me that it would be really cool if SS1 could be ported to the Atari Jaguar CD.

Quote

Okay, but wasn't Robinson's Requiem running full on texture mapped... blah blah blah.... Just saying. I could be wrong though.

You are discussing a re-write and not a port - there is no way in hell the Jaguar could run a port of this game at anything even remotely resembling a playable speed.

[T2KFREEKER]

CyranoJ, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 4:56 PM, said:

The original question was:

Quote

It struck me that it would be really cool if SS1 could be ported to the Atari Jaguar CD.

Quote

Okay, but wasn't Robinson's Requiem running full on texture mapped... blah blah blah.... Just saying. I could be wrong though.

You are discussing a re-write and not a port - there is no way in hell the Jaguar could run a port of this game at anything even remotely resembling a playable speed.

Okay, you got me there. I guess that System Shock could be rewritten for the Jaguar CD system. You are right.

[JagChris]

CyranoJ, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 6:38 AM, said:

This coming from someone who can't even manage to work out how someone else's "Hello World" program works.... Clearly you are qualified to make that judgement call

You know what? Forget it, it's clear you are only in this thread (forum?) to troll. I ain't feeding you, I'd rather be productive and make some games instead.

You're right. I should of expressed this in a more constructive manner. My apologies.

[JagChris]

sh3-rg, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 4:18 PM, said:

Punisher5.0, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 12:22 PM, said:

I have never considered JagChris a troll or accused him of trolling. I thought he brought up a valid counter point.

He's not a troll at all, guilty only of being over-enthusiastic when it comes to the Jaguar and probably lacking a meaningful understanding of the machine and its capabilities when it comes to these types of discussions. TBF, I'd rather someone like that post for honest, genuine and what they think are positive reasons (however pointless these what if/could the jaguar do/etc posts) than the try-hard shit-stirring earlier by Jag Slave.

As for Chris' 'valid counter point', really it wasn't all that valid as he only considered memory requirements in his statement, probably one of the least relevant requirements considering the PC has a lot of other crap bloating that anyway. The big difference in the game he chose to prove his point would be 386SX vs 486DX2... if anyone remembers upgrading through that path they're sure to be aware of the huge gulf in performance there. Now look at RR on the Jaguar, not particularly stunning. So no, that proves nothing other than taking a 386sx PC game to the Jaguar has proved to be possible in the past but even then at a cost to game performance.

The whole minimum-PC-requirements to prove X/Y/Z thing is obviously a bit iffy but is a quick way to gain an idea of what the original game entails and required at the time when originally created by a team of professionals. Of course, if you were attempting to recreate some old PC game again for the Jaguar, it'd be a ground-up remake not a port. The way you'd go about a lot of things would have to be very different... and you'd be wasting time doing something utterly boring, pointless and possibly illegal, but that's for another discussion.

To be fair to CJ, in the case of System Shock, the minimum suggested PC requirements do give a quick impression of just why the Jaguar isn't really going to be a suitable platform for the game without making fairly drastic compromises and alterations. It's probably possible to make an approximation of the game for the jaguar. It'd be a much worse experience than the PC game that already exists. It'd probably take a small team a significant amount of time even as a day job.

So then, the real problem with threads like this is they serve no purpose other than to cause people to disagree with each other over something that will never happen and probably not that many people even want to happen. So what's the fucking point? If you absolutely must have a thread like this, make it a poll with three options and no comments allowed:

1. YES
2. NO
3. PLEASE STOP MAKING THREADS LIKE THIS, THEY SUCK AND DO MORE HARM THAN GOOD!

I am going to politely disagree with you. You have NO RIGHT to dictate what we may or may not discuss on this forum in these threads or if we do in what way we may discuss them. Unless you name is AL. There are TONS of threads posted on here and JSII I skip right over just based on their title because I am not interested in the topic. If you or anyone else does not like the topic of a thread, then please ignore it.

[JagChris]

On JSII IRC

T2KFREEKER Yo!
T2KFREEKER Anyone here
06:17 Guest22399 yeah i'm here gimme a few to change my nick
06:18 Guest22399 lol@chicky
Guest22399 hey sweetpea
JagChris Nick/channel is temporarily unavailable
06:19 JagChris Nick/channel is temporarily unavailable
Chickybaby sorry in an out bean is playing up, jst thought I would see how you guys are *hugs*
T2KFREEKER no probs buddy
06:20 T2KFREEKER hey chicks long time no see
06:23 Guest22399 changes nick to JagChris
06:24 -> sh3-rg has joined jaguar_sector_ii
sh3-rg lol at jagtards
sh3-rg sad fuckers
sh3-rg where is kizza
sh3-rg tell him I said hi
06:25 JagChris sh3
<- sh3-rg has disconnected (Client Quit)

that was pretty bad

EDIT: It's been verified that it was Laird that made these posts and not sh3-rg

[T2KFREEKER]

JagChris, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 7:26 PM, said:

On JSII IRC

T2KFREEKER Yo!
T2KFREEKER Anyone here
06:17 Guest22399 yeah i'm here gimme a few to change my nick
06:18 Guest22399 lol@chicky
Guest22399 hey sweetpea
JagChris Nick/channel is temporarily unavailable
06:19 JagChris Nick/channel is temporarily unavailable
Chickybaby sorry in an out bean is playing up, jst thought I would see how you guys are *hugs*
T2KFREEKER no probs buddy
06:20 T2KFREEKER hey chicks long time no see
06:23 Guest22399 changes nick to JagChris
06:24 -> sh3-rg has joined jaguar_sector_ii
sh3-rg lol at jagtards
sh3-rg sad fuckers
sh3-rg where is kizza
sh3-rg tell him I said hi
06:25 JagChris sh3
<- sh3-rg has disconnected (Client Quit)

that was pretty bad

Well, it's been established that this wasn't really me. Yes, it was bad.

[JagChris]

T2KFREEKER, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 8:20 PM, said:

JagChris, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 7:26 PM, said:

On JSII IRC

T2KFREEKER Yo!
T2KFREEKER Anyone here
06:17 Guest22399 yeah i'm here gimme a few to change my nick
06:18 Guest22399 lol@chicky
Guest22399 hey sweetpea
JagChris Nick/channel is temporarily unavailable
06:19 JagChris Nick/channel is temporarily unavailable
Chickybaby sorry in an out bean is playing up, jst thought I would see how you guys are *hugs*
T2KFREEKER no probs buddy
06:20 T2KFREEKER hey chicks long time no see
06:23 Guest22399 changes nick to JagChris
06:24 -> sh3-rg has joined jaguar_sector_ii
sh3-rg lol at jagtards
sh3-rg sad fuckers
sh3-rg where is kizza
sh3-rg tell him I said hi
06:25 JagChris sh3
<- sh3-rg has disconnected (Client Quit)

that was pretty bad

Well, it's been established that this wasn't really me. Yes, it was bad.

And we're pretty sure it wasnt SH3.

[T2KFREEKER]

JagChris, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 8:22 PM, said:

T2KFREEKER, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 8:20 PM, said:

JagChris, on Sat Sep 3, 2011 7:26 PM, said:

On JSII IRC

T2KFREEKER Yo!
T2KFREEKER Anyone here
06:17 Guest22399 yeah i'm here gimme a few to change my nick
06:18 Guest22399 lol@chicky
Guest22399 hey sweetpea
JagChris Nick/channel is temporarily unavailable
06:19 JagChris Nick/channel is temporarily unavailable
Chickybaby sorry in an out bean is playing up, jst thought I would see how you guys are *hugs*
T2KFREEKER no probs buddy
06:20 T2KFREEKER hey chicks long time no see
06:23 Guest22399 changes nick to JagChris
06:24 -> sh3-rg has joined jaguar_sector_ii
sh3-rg lol at jagtards
sh3-rg sad fuckers
sh3-rg where is kizza
sh3-rg tell him I said hi
06:25 JagChris sh3
<- sh3-rg has disconnected (Client Quit)

that was pretty bad

Well, it's been established that this wasn't really me. Yes, it was bad.

And we're pretty sure it wasnt SH3.

Yup. Sad really. Nothing better to do than stir up crap. Now, Back to System Shock. I don't want to be responsible for derailing someone elses thread.

[Punisher5.0]

Very disappointing how this thread turned out.