Subject: Re: [TI994A] Mario Bros

From: "Tursi" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2010 16:06:38 -0700

> Thanks for links and insight. I guess there wasn't a development thread or 
> something.

No development thread as it was done in secret for the most part.

>Approximately how much of the 48k of code is system binaries and libraries 
>?

The map file says about 1.5k is libraries - there are a few functions in 
there I didn't actually use. I considered the Z80 code produced by the 
compiler to be pretty loose, though, taking more space than needed.

>Was there other programmers involved ?

No, only me.

>Was there someone else doing the graphics and/or sounds ?

RetroIllucid did all the graphics. Most of the sounds were based on the NES 
version, with a friend of mine producing a couple that were not available.

>How many was directly involved with the project. I think of mainly 
>programmers, artists and testers.

Just two, myself and Retro, plus my friend who helped out on two sounds.

> I might consider the Coleco for future projects (it sounds like something 
> grand, but it's not). I didn't have a Coleco or MSX back in the day, but 
> these are nice and maybe more "simple" machines. I learned Z80 before 9900 
> on the Sinclairs.
>

Since I coded it in C, it was pretty much like working on the TI to me - 
same video chip, same sound chip, and without using assembly the CPU is 
hidden. There is the issue of the vertical blank interrupt not being 
maskable on the Coleco (it's on the NMI), but my later titles I realized I 
could control that from the VDP itself with fairly good reliability. Coleco 
programmers tend to rely on flags to avoid conflict, but I didn't like that 
solution. (As they apparently don't like mine, there's a thread at AA about 
it. Apparently leaving interrupts turned off in your main loop is no good 
for action games. I guess we better go tell TI to redo Munchman and Parsec 
;) ).

> TI
> RAM: 256 bytes
> ROM: 8k
> Coleco
> RAM: 1k
> ROM: 32k

Yep, that's about right.

> Is that correct ? Not that GROM and/or bank switching isn't something 
> possible, but it gives a bit of overhead for the developer. You said 64k 
> cartridge for Mario - do you bank switch ?
>

Yes.. we used the Megacart scheme, which gives you one fixed bank of 16k, 
and one pagable bank of 16k. We used 4 banks. I did the bank switching 
manually in my code, so I had to control which bank was active at what time. 
I actually had a few helper macros to make temporary bank switches simpler. 
;)

---

From: "kabldb" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2010 04:13:44 -0000

Very impressive, thank you. Very slick and detailed game.

:-)

---

From: "kabldb" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2010 06:24:47 -0000

> I actually had a few helper macros to make temporary bank switches simpler. 

Nice solution for programmers to work with. A similar solution for the TI with fixed and pagable banks of 4k would be - well, I don't know ... ScratchPad is already under a lot of pressure, but a 64k game would have like 64/4-1 = 15 pages to keep track of ...

:-)

---

From: "Ksarul" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2010 10:15:20 -0400

The latest revisions of the 64K cartridge board actually allow that many 8K
pages, using the extra latch on the 379 and a larger EPROM (128K), but
unless you did a run of the boards using the layout I did for Jon a while
back to incorporate his switched 512K carts, it has to be hacked in.  He did
a run of four of them to test them out, but that was all as there wasn't
much in the way of demand for them even after he put up pix of his hack.
The 379 substitute Matthew did using a GAL gives us SIX latches, allowing up
to 64 of those 8K pages.  I am busy incorporating that mod into a possible
future board layout.  Look over at the cart thread on AtariAge for more
information and a picture of a work-in-progress 512K bare board. . made
before we knew about Matthew's GAL.  512K would make for a monster of a
game. . .even if 4K of every bank was being reserved to keep identical
copies of the banking/branching tables for the game functions.  And for the
SMT-challenged, there are NO SMT parts on these. . .even though I did use a
PLCC Flash chip for the ROM (not in-circuit reprogrammable as designed,
though the jumpers are there to permit it).

Jim Fetzner   

  _____  

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
kabldb
Sent: Sunday, October 03, 2010 2:25 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [TI994A] Re: Mario Bros

> I actually had a few helper macros to make temporary bank switches
simpler. 

Nice solution for programmers to work with. A similar solution for the TI
with fixed and pagable banks of 4k would be - well, I don't know ...
ScratchPad is already under a lot of pressure, but a 64k game would have
like 64/4-1 = 15 pages to keep track of ...

:-)

---

From: "Charlie" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 15:14:27 -0000

There is a port of Mario Bros for the TI?
Is it on a disk image? Link please! :)

Charlie

---

From: mark wills <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 18:11:03 +0100 (BST)

There is a clip of it on YouTube (unless it's a hoax?). I'm not sure if it's 
written in XB or not.

It's pretty poor, unfortunately.

----- Original Message ----
> From: Charlie <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Sun, 17 October, 2010 16:14:27

> >  ;)
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------
> 
> Yahoo!  Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>

---

From: Gregory McGill <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 10:45:52 -0700

there is an XB version, the one on youtube.. its poor at best

On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 10:11 AM, mark wills <[email-masked]>wrote:

> > From: Charlie <[email-masked] <chazbeenhad%40hotmail.com>>
> > To: [email-masked] <TI994A%40yahoogroups.com>
> > --- In [email-masked] <TI994A%40yahoogroups.com>, "Tursi"
> <yahoogroup@...> wrote:
> > >

---

From: "kabldb" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 03:23:32 -0000

There's a slight difference between Mario Bros. and Super Mario Bros.

The first was originally an arcade game from 1983 by Nintendo. This is the one Tursi has been involved with on the ColecoVision.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Bros.

The second was a NES game sequel from 1985 also by Nintendo. The YouTube video is based on this. It not a hoax. I believe it's XB with a bit of assembly support. Also I think graphics and gameplay are in the better half of what's been seen on the TI-99 - even considering category (XB with assembly support). I only played it once and lost track of it, so I can't put up a link for it or comment on the year of production.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Mario_Bros.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQ89U5CWBzA

:-)

--- In [email-masked], Gregory McGill <arcadeshopper@...> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 10:11 AM, mark wills <markrobertwills@...>wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > > From: Charlie <chazbeenhad@... <chazbeenhad%40hotmail.com>>
> > <yahoogroup@> wrote:

---

From: tursi <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 20:55:30 -0700 (PDT)

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Bros.

i'd like to ask people to please stop posting i was involved.. i answered 
the questions but expected that it would fade off. :)

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQ89U5CWBzA

that's my video too.. i bought the game new. i disgree that it has any 
merit at all.. gameplay is nonexistant, load time is ridiculous, and i 
dont even agree on the graphics - mario himself is the only part that 
looks acceptable.

I am a little extra hard on it because of the ads claiming it pushed the 
TI to it's limits. ;)