It is currently Wed Oct 18, 2017 1:16 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Texture Mapping
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:29 pm 
Hi there,

Anyone tried implementing Texture Mapping on NES?


Brian


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 2:04 pm
Posts: 2129
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States
I may sound like an idiot, but do you just mean like textures on tiles? Yeah, just draw the textures on the tiles in the pattern tables... I'm probably making a fool of myself, because I don't exactly know what you mean.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 12:08 am 
Sorry I think I have misled you.

It should be texture mapping for 3D objects.

Brian


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 12:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2004 10:59 pm
Posts: 1389
3D objects have been done on the NES, though only in wire frame - see the game "Elite", as well as "Tank Demo" (same author).

Texture mapping, however, is almost certainly out of the question, as it would require far too much CPU time and PPU bandwidth to be feasible.

_________________
Quietust, QMT Productions
P.S. If you don't get this note, let me know and I'll write you another.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 8:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:43 pm
Posts: 10052
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
I was working on a raycaster a couple of months ago. The walls were meant to be textured, and I think there is enough time for that, with the specs I intended. I didn't get to the playable demo stage, there is no output to the screen yet. I got a little bored with that and am now working on a platform engine (it's more fun!), but may get back to the raycaster some time. I know it is not "texture mapping" in the most 3D sense (raycaster is fake 3D anyway) and the textures can not rotate, they're just distorted.

This is what the engine was supposed to look like (it does, in the PC version not yet fully ported to the NES):
Image
Image
This shows only one texture, but I had many more, with 3 different colors of walls on screen at a time. It has a fairly low resolution of 28x64 "pixels" that can make the textures pretty unrecognizable from a certain distance. The textures are 1bpp (light and dark shade of the same color, using dithering), have a resolution of 8x16 pixels and are shaded for light and dark walls, as in wolfenstein 3D. I was targeting a framerate of 8 to 10 fps. Slow, but since it'd be a first in the NES it'd be OK.

EDIT: added 1 more picture.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:49 pm
Posts: 7230
Location: Chexbres, VD, Switzerland
Scince 2D is better than 3D I really cannot see any interest about making 3D on a 2D console, it just greetly waste it's hardware feature. Go for PSX dev if you want to do 3D on a console.
The only way I like 3D is in isometric games. I really considered it, but I conclued it was nearly impossible to have decent isometric graphics wihtout using MMC5's exram, and decent means have more than 3 or 4 different kinds of ground.

_________________
Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary components.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: attribute tables
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:07 am
Posts: 117
Location: Chile (South America), Quilpué
hi tokumaru... if i read 32 bytes * 30 bytes of nametables... the next is one byte for this nametable, the byte that people call attribute table??????

then attribute table is only one byte??

_________________
Good day to nesdev people. Lord..
Author of nothing =P
UTFSM Sansano programmer.. lord_Chile
Saludos a la Sede JMC de la UTFSM... Viña del Mar, CHILE


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:43 pm
Posts: 10052
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
lord_Chile, I barelly understood what you said. It has nothing to do with the topic, but each name table is 960 (32*30) bytes long. Right after is the attributte table for that name table, and it's 64 (8*8) bytes long. Each name table + attribute table pair is 1024 (960 + 64) bytes, or 1kb long. The NES has 2kb of VRAM, so we get 2 name tables and 2 attribute tables. If that's what you were asking.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: yes tokumaru but
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:07 am
Posts: 117
Location: Chile (South America), Quilpué
good luck

_________________
Good day to nesdev people. Lord..
Author of nothing =P
UTFSM Sansano programmer.. lord_Chile
Saludos a la Sede JMC de la UTFSM... Viña del Mar, CHILE


Last edited by lord_Chile on Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:43 am, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yes tokumaru but
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 9:23 am
Posts: 1194
Location: Behind you with a knife!
lord_Chile wrote:
if you go to newbie help center.. just any people called "bregalad" says that my questions are stupid.. english is not so easy for me.. any documents are bivalent and im very newbie.. anyway very thanks and i everytime knows that brazilian people is nice people.. good luck


This guy slays me...

Trying things like this on the NES is not a waste of time. Sure you can do loads of things on the PSX but we want to do them on the NES. The whole point is not making flashy graphics but pushing the NES's capabilities to the limit.

_________________
http://www.jamesturner.de/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yes tokumaru but
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:49 pm
Posts: 7230
Location: Chexbres, VD, Switzerland
WedNESday wrote:
Trying things like this on the NES is not a waste of time. Sure you can do loads of things on the PSX but we want to do them on the NES. The whole point is not making flashy graphics but pushing the NES's capabilities to the limit.

I agree on that point, but I don't think polygon drawing is very fair in this aera. While technically interesting, it most probably never would be reliable for a finished game or even a demo, unlike several other limitepushing tehcniques already discussed. Additionally, I really dislike polygon-based graphics, but effectively it becomes personall opinion here, so people may like.

_________________
Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary components.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:43 pm
Posts: 10052
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
Bregalad wrote:
Scince 2D is better than 3D

I agree, but that's subjective. Most people here must agree too, or we wouldn't be NESdev'ing, but not everyone in the world thinks that. =)

Quote:
I really cannot see any interest about making 3D on a 2D console, it just greetly waste it's hardware feature.

It's a novelty. I think it is really nice to see stuff that was not meant to be done for a particular console actually beeing done. I don't expect anyone to make a hit 3D game for the NES, but a few 3D demos would be very interesting to see. It's just cool.

Quote:
Go for PSX dev if you want to do 3D on a console.

Then it's not fun, 'cause that's what the console is supposed to do and there are already thousands of 3D games for it.

Quote:
The only way I like 3D is in isometric games. I really considered it, but I conclued it was nearly impossible to have decent isometric graphics wihtout using MMC5's exram, and decent means have more than 3 or 4 different kinds of ground.

I feel it is just sad that people would rather stick to the mediocre that's already been done a thousand times than to dare and make something different and face some challenge. A nice isometric game is definatelly possible, you'll just have to think A LOT to come up with a good engine.

I'm having the time of my life trying to code a fast platformer for the NES. Every once in a while I find myself screaming "Oh no! It's not possible to do this! I'm gonna kill myself!", just to find a solution for the problem a few minutes/hours later. I just need to think a lot about it. Some times I get ideas in the shower, in the bus, you know, the most weird places. That's where the best ideas come from. =)

It was not easy to come up with the ideas used in the raycaster either. I managed to get rid of ALL divisions, and the multiplications left are very few and are mostly 8-bits. It was not easy to come up with a division-free raycaster. Look around, you'll not find any (that doesn't suffer from graphical glitches because of it, at least). I had many good ideas for this one and it would be a shame if I didn't finish it. I'm just not in the mood for it lately, as it would be just a demo. I'd like to finish a game.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: yes tokumaru but
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:43 pm
Posts: 10052
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
lord_Chile wrote:
i listen to wednesday saying uhhh what easy it... or can you making a emulator eh??.. or bregalad saying.. but it's all documented, your question is stupid.. yeah.. but for what dont response friendly??

Well, WedNESday is always a bit short-tempred, don't mind him. But you have to understand it is not very easy for us either. OK, you're a newbie asking about something you don't understand, and there is nothing wrong about that. But the more experienced people in the list were already asked the same questions so many times, that it may not be easy to give a friendly answer.

And most of the basic stuff is indeed written everywhere, it may just not be very clear the first few times you read. I read the basic documents many many times when I first started, and it was really hard to understand all that. But people shouldn't cry for help the first time something is unclear. Most of the times, if you re-read the stuff a few more times and really think about what you're reading it will come to you. If it doesn't, a little experimenting and/or observation will do the job.

People here get mad when it's clear the newbie hasn't tried hard enough to understand what he's asking. But no one can read minds, and a hardworking newbie may get bashed for nothing. =)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:49 pm
Posts: 7230
Location: Chexbres, VD, Switzerland
tokumaru wrote:
It's a novelty. I think it is really nice to see stuff that was not meant to be done for a particular console actually beeing done. I don't expect anyone to make a hit 3D game for the NES, but a few 3D demos would be very interesting to see. It's just cool.

Yeah, I didn't see it was uninteresting. I mean it would be very slow and look very bad, in fact it would most likely look pure crap, but it only is my opinion.

Quote:
Then it's not fun, 'cause that's what the console is supposed to do and there are already thousands of 3D games for it.

I don't think it would be not fun, because it still is a challenge. There is much less unofficial PSXDeveloppers than NES developpers. But sure the challenge will be different. And also the PSX could allow a decent design environnement for 3D games, but the NES won't. Even if any would come up with an engine drawing decent polygons, they won't look good, but having a 2D game on NES will look way, way, way, way, better "even if it has already be done".

Quote:
I feel it is just sad that people would rather stick to the mediocre that's already been done a thousand times than to dare and make something different and face some challenge. A nice isometric game is definatelly possible, you'll just have to think A LOT to come up with a good engine.

Well, you're getting pretty wrong here. You can come with a game that have some similarities with others in therm of graphic style, and that has totally innovative gamplay, or story, or whatever. Not only the graphics make a game, you know.
However, I'm still thinking about a good isometric engine. I have pretty much the choise between seriously restric possiblilities by keeping two copy of each map, one in tiles and one in "real 3d", then make them match, or haing only 4 different textures that would fit all the BG pattern tables with height combinations, and would even need to use sprites to draw the field sometimes (I planned to use tile precision height, unlike your attemps in the other thread that use 2 tiles precision height).
So yeah, it sure is possible, but it is very limited. I haven't taken a definite abandon on making an isometric game on the NES, trough. I just conclued that MMC5's exgrafix is almost needed for something decent. I'd really like to do without trough.

Quote:
I'm having the time of my life trying to code a fast platformer for the NES. Every once in a while I find myself screaming "Oh no! It's not possible to do this! I'm gonna kill myself!", just to find a solution for the problem a few minutes/hours later. I just need to think a lot about it. Some times I get ideas in the shower, in the bus, you know, the most weird places. That's where the best ideas come from. =)

Well, I got ideas from my bed often.

_________________
Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary components.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:43 pm
Posts: 10052
Location: Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
Bregalad wrote:
I don't think it would be not fun, because it still is a challenge. There is much less unofficial PSXDeveloppers than NES developpers. But sure the challenge will be different. And also the PSX could allow a decent design environnement for 3D games, but the NES won't. Even if any would come up with an engine drawing decent polygons, they won't look good, but having a 2D game on NES will look way, way, way, way, better "even if it has already be done".

I just feel there is a big difference from this:
Code:
-Hey man, check out this game.
-Nice NES game.
-I made it, you know?
-Cool, looks just like a real NES game. You could have worked for Nintendo back then.

To this:
Code:
-Hey man, check out this game.
-Nice game.
-I made it for the NES, you know?
-Awesome! You really pulled this off using a NES!? Awesome!


You see? The "wow" factor... Both are nice games, but one of them just stands out.

Quote:
Well, you're getting pretty wrong here. You can come with a game that have some similarities with others in therm of graphic style, and that has totally innovative gamplay, or story, or whatever. Not only the graphics make a game, you know.

Couldn't agree more. I can enjoy some pretty ugly games because of how much fun they are. But if you have 2 equaly amusing games, one with great graphics and one with lousy graphics. Wich one would you rather play? I'm not saying you should choose graphics over fun, hell no. But unless one is incompatible with the other you should have both. In fact, I said 3D demos for the NES would be cool exactly because it would be nearly impossible to get good gameplay from a 3D NES game.

Quote:
However, I'm still thinking about a good isometric engine.

That's great! I'd really like to see the game some day. Isometric view is one of my favorite things in the game world.

Quote:
I just conclued that MMC5's exgrafix is almost needed for something decent. I'd really like to do without trough.
Quote:
Well, I got ideas from my bed often.

Well, maybe some day your bed will show you the way out of MMC5! =) I actually believe it can happen!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 36 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group