Would Super Mario Bros 3 be possible on the 7800?

[Leo_A]

It hasn't been established at all that the Atari 7800 wasn't good at scrolling.

All we've had is a handful of people stating that scrolling titles were something the console wasn't designed to do well. And their entire basis for that statement is because platformers were nearly absent on the platform due to Atari not ever bringing the console much past early 1980s single screen arcade titles.

The fact that a genre doesn't really exists doesn't make their statements on the 7800's hardware accurate. There are plenty of 7800 releases with scrolling that work very well, such as the port of Xevious. Even the Atari 2600 could handle scrolling very well, as dozens of releases like River Raid show.

[GroovyBee]

We've already established how poorly the 7800 handles scrolling, but even overcoming that, it seems really unlikely to me that a 7800 version of SMB3 would be on the same level as the real thing.

You've obviously not played my 7800 homebrew game Apple Snaffle then? It scrolls in 4 directions in 1 pixel increments.

[tomaitheous]

You've obviously not played my 7800 homebrew game Apple Snaffle then? It scrolls in 4 directions in 1 pixel increments.

That's not anything to brag about - lol

[7th lutz]

We've already established how poorly the 7800 handles scrolling, but even overcoming that, it seems really unlikely to me that a 7800 version of SMB3 would be on the same level as the real thing.

Not at all. You need to play GroovyBee's Apple Sniffle. It is one of the best example of scrolling for the Atari 7800.

The last Work in progress available for Apple Sniffle is found at http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic...st__p__1799150 .

[7th lutz]

I think some of you also need to play PacManPlus's Failsafe. It scrolls left/right for all 6 Levels. The game scrolls forward, and you can't go backwards.

The latest availble version of Failsafe is found at http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic...st__p__1896615

[Rob2600]

I think some of you also need to play PacManPlus's Failsafe. It scrolls left/right for all 6 Levels. The game scrolls forward, and you can't go backwards.

The latest availble version of Failsafe is found at http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic...st__p__1896615

This:





vs. this:





The 7800's scrolling capabilities may be fine, but it obviously needs to be able to do more than just that.

[Ed Oscuro]

Just to stir things up, it was years (and a hardware revision) before the MSX series did *good* scrolling comparable to the NES. The MSX2 can do it in software - not pretty, but it gets the job done. Bioman 4 for the MSX looks and probably plays nicely but the scrolling would drive me nuts.

[GroovyBee]

This :-



11 colours

vs



30 colours

[Ed Oscuro]

The image data reports 30 colors but that doesn't mean there were 30 in the source (or, more accurately, that anybody can tell). About half are wasted as fake gradients between the gradients already in the source image. Don't know about the tricks necessary to bring the color count above 25 or if they will slow down the action.

It also looks half-rez and just as importantly doesn't seem to be set up for scrolling.

[GroovyBee]

The image data reports 30 colors but that doesn't mean there were 30 in the source (or, more accurately, that anybody can tell).

There are 30. I should know. I wrote the game .

About half are wasted as fake gradients between the gradients already in the source image. Don't know about the tricks necessary to bring the color count above 25 or if they will slow down the action.

The game engine will top out at about 64 colours on screen at the same time. It does not slow the action down.

It also looks half-rez and just as importantly doesn't seem to be set up for scrolling.

Its the 7800's 160A mode so thats 160 pixels across the screen. I agree its not a scrolling game.

[Ed Oscuro]

Thanks for those clarifications! I wonder why the colors tend to be so closely grouped together (which prompted my comment) - I take it this was an artistic issue? At a glance, you'd think that SMB was the more colorful game simply because it's using all its colors to create a more "full" world, whereas the colors in your game seem mainly intended to flesh out extra detail (but some of those are barely visible).

[gdement]

The image data reports 30 colors but that doesn't mean there were 30 in the source (or, more accurately, that anybody can tell). About half are wasted as fake gradients between the gradients already in the source image. Don't know about the tricks necessary to bring the color count above 25 or if they will slow down the action.

It also looks half-rez and just as importantly doesn't seem to be set up for scrolling.

The 7800 is scanline oriented. Graphical limitations on the 7800 are most appropriately expressed in terms of a scanline, not the screen. You can reconfigure anything between scanlines and the graphics chip doesn't care. This isn't really a new trick - the system has built-in support for interrupts that fire at the end of programmer-selected scanlines. The original docs recommend using this feature to change palette colors. It can also be used to change the video mode.

In low-res mode, the limit is 25 colors per scanline. There's a rom that displays all 256 colors with their corresponding hex values (16 per line).

====
The biggest advantage the 7800 has for color, in my opinion, is the 4bpp support. Normally an object uses 2-bits per pixel, for 3 colors + transparency. That's the same as a NES. However, you can also use 4-bits, which gives 12 colors + transparency. This is controlled at the object level, so you can still use 2bpp on other objects sharing the scanline.

I don't really like the choice of video modes though. One is low resolution with lots of color, and the others are high resolution with much less color. The NES has a better compromise IMO.

[GroovyBee]

Thanks for those clarifications! I wonder why the colors tend to be so closely grouped together (which prompted my comment) - I take it this was an artistic issue?

The graphics are not all final yet. Some are just placeholders so I can layout rooms.

At a glance, you'd think that SMB was the more colorful game simply because it's using all its colors to create a more "full" world, whereas the colors in your game seem mainly intended to flesh out extra detail (but some of those are barely visible).

The emulator screenshots don't do my game justice . The extra colours together with the anti-aliasing caused by the TV make the game much more 3D looking than it comes across.

Anyways... I've thread jacked enough. I was just trying to point out that the 7800 back catalogue didn't push the machine as much as people think. Back over to the SMB3 argument .

[DracIsBack]

Oh wow - we've had so many of these discussions over at Atariage - I forget that these topics haven't always been discussed elsewhere.

First, it's important to remember that the NES and 7800 are essentially good at opposite things. The NES is strong on tiles and sound, weak on sprites and display tricks. The 7800 is strong on sprites and display tricks, weak on sound and tiles.

That said, I am kind of amused by some of the "all or nothing" statements here. Even the "no - it can't do Super Mario 3" seems all or nothing to me. Could it replicate Super Mario 3 100% in every way? No. I don't think the SMS could either. No systems are 100% in every way.

The real question is how close or not the 7800 would get, in the right hands, under the right conditions.

There have also been great points raised in the thread, though I wanted to comment on a few that I've seen.

“I see that the 7800 had a stronger CPU.”

The 7800 and NES are both 6502 based systems. Comparing one 8-bit 6502 based system running at 1.79 mhz against a second 8-bit 6502 based system running at 1.79 mhz is probably not the right comparison. Really, the discussion is around the differences in graphics and sound hardware.

“the nes is stronger then the 7800.”

Again, that's a black or white statement, all or nothing statement. It's not that simple.

“The 7800's problem was the system was not built with enough rom and ram inside the system.”

Not really sure how "ROM" plays into this. RAM, you could argue a bit though it should be in the context of how the system works and not a simple comparison of how much RAM it had vs. other 8-bit systems. For example, the NES only has 2K video RAM and 2K RAM while the 5200 had 16K.

“That is a big game of system that was only released due to the Tramiel family seeing how well the nes was selling.”

I thought this for a long time too, but it was pointed out to be incorrect. The NES didn't have a particularly successful 1985 and the 7800 was released early in 1986 because of strong 2600 sales.

“but of the three(SMS, NES, and 7800), the 7800 was by far the weakest on scrolling games.”

I own all three too. I lean towards the SMS and NES in this department given their architecture but I also believe that SMS and NES were pushed more and the 7800 was not. Therefore, I don't think the comparison is entirely fair.

“I don't believe that. Look at the XEGS version of Mario Bros. vs the 7800.”

Fine. Look at the XEGS version of TOWER TOPPLER vs. the 7800. Or COMMANDO. Or DESERT FALCON. :-)

Seriously though, you're actually raising a good point here.

As others have noted, the Tramiels were really cheap. They hired cheap dev houses, they paid for short development cycles. They refused to allow larger cartridge sizes, additional RAM, POKEYs, Battery Backups etc due to cost.

With the XEGS, many games on that system were cartridge ports of existing disk based games licensed after the sales had dried up. Tramiel didn't "fund" the development, just the license and distribution rights. In some cases the quality was typically higher.

With the 7800, he funded the license and distribution rights and then paid for the development. Especially in the early days, you can see where he cheaped out. Compare the awful 7800 Karateka port. Look at Summer Games which has fewer events on the 7800 than the XE.

To give a reverse example: look at "DESERT FALCON" on the 7800 and XEGS. On the 7800, it was designed by the original developers of the 7800. On the XEGS, it was quickly ported after the fact and it sucks.

“When people talk about the graphical abilities of the 7800, they always bring up Commando. Commando looks very good on the 7800. It's also one game. One game you're comparing to a proto of a XEGS game. Give me one more example of a 7800 game that's graphically superior to an XEGS game and then we'll talk.”

Feel free to show the XEGS running ALIEN BRIGADE, TOWER TOPPLER, SCRAPYARD DOG, MIDNIGHT MUTANTS, BASKETBRAWL, NINJA GOLF, SIRIUS, PLUTOS, and most of the later 7800 games. The XEGS is a good machine but there are most definitely areas where the 7800 is stronger in the graphics dept.

“Scrapyard Dog is the only scrolling platform game for the Atari 7800 that isn't a demo.“

Just to be clear though - there are LOTS of 7800 games that scroll - with colorful backgrounds and without. People sometimes mistake the tile issue for it not being able to scroll. The thing has hardware assisted scrolling and many games show it - Xevious, Desert Falcon, Dark Chambers, Scapyard Dog, Midnight Mutants, Commando, Ikari Warriors, Impossible Mission, Jinks, Ninja Golf, Sirius, and Tower Toppler all scroll. :-)

“The Atari 7800 didn't exactly have great programmers back in the day like the person that did Karateka, Hat Trick, and Choplifter!.”

I think the other issue as well was that Tramiel put a lot of constraints - get it done fast, get it done cheap, don't ask for extras.

The head of GCC had a funny quote about Jack wanting games on the system but "not really wanting to pay people to make them".

The other challenge was the NES issue. Nintendo locked people out of making their games for competing consoles. Naturally, companies would go to where the money is, as the best developers did. That move barred them from taking the same talent to competitive consoles later. While games commonly come out on all three major systems now, they didn't then.

“BUT had the 7800 been 100% exploited, it likely could've produced a game that the NES could not replicate."

Stick the NES on something like RESCUE ON FRACTALUS or with a lot of moving objects and you'll see its own limits.

“The NES didn't really have a need for one though. The 7800 did. A Pokey chip wasn't expensive, but to a Tramiel era Atari, something that added $1-2 to the manufacturing cost of a game was unacceptable no matter what it's benefit was.”

There were actually plans to have a low cost chip (GUMBY) but that was cancelled.

“Commando and Ballblazer both had a Pokey sound chip”

Commando actually uses both the POKEY and the TIA for sound. That's why the music is a little bit broader in that game than the XEGS. The POKEY does the music, the TIA does the sound effects.

“There's an audio interview with the guys who formed GCC and designed the 7800 somewhere on this site, but I can't seem to find it.“

http://www.atarimuseum.com/videogame...800/7800-20th/

“If I remember correctly, the 7800 features the same CPU as the 5200. The difference is the 7800 has less RAM, but a more powerful graphics chip. Based on those specs, how much better was the 7800 than the 5200, XEGS, or ColecoVision?”

RAM is not the best comparison. The NES has less RAM than the 5200 too.

“To me, the NES's higher resolution makes a huge difference. I hate the 7800's low-res, stretched out pixels.”

I never noticed it (and I owned multiple systems) until a few people brought it up. Regardless, both are pretty "low res" systems.

“We've already established how poorly the 7800 handles scrolling”

I don't think we have.

“I was just trying to point out that the 7800 back catalogue didn't push the machine as much as people think.”

GroovyBee has it.

[Rob2600]

This :-



11 colours

vs



30 colours

In those screen shots, Super Mario Bros. 3 still looks better to me. I think it's because of the higher resolution of the NES.

Again, I hate the stretched out look of 7800 and C64 games. Those wide pixels drive me nuts.

[Mitch]

Stick the NES on something like RESCUE ON FRACTALUS or with a lot of moving objects and you'll see its own limits.

Even better compare 7800 Ballblazer to the Famicom version. It's not even close, the 7800 version wins easily.

Mitch

[7th lutz]

PacManPlus on Atariage has done a good amount of homebrew Atari 7800.

He said "FailSafe has 255 columns (8 pixels each) of scrolling. It used to scroll in both directions, but I didn't see the point of scrolling the screen backward so I took it out. When you have the 'SpeedUp' power up, it scrolls pretty quickly and smoothly.

The only two limitations I see for porting SMB3 on the 7800 is the number of colors per zone, and horizontal resolution (I would keep it at 160x2 instead of 320A or B mode - strictly for CPU time's sake). But that's it."

PacManPlus said that on http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic...st__p__1899676 .

[Rob2600]

Even better compare 7800 Ballblazer to the Famicom version. It's not even close, the 7800 version wins easily.

Mitch

You're right, the 7800 version of Ballblazer was much better:

Quick Clips - Atari 7800 - 003 - Ballblazer video

NES:

lets play "ball blazer" (NES) video


Even the 5200 version was better:

Atari 5200 Ballblazer video


It's a moot point for me though because I don't ever plan on playing any version of Ballblazer. It's just not my kind of game. It's a nice tech demo though.

[Steve W]

You're right, the 7800 version of Ballblazer was much better:

Quick Clips - Atari 7800 - 003 - Ballblazer video

NES:

lets play "ball blazer" (NES) video


Even the 5200 version was better:

Atari 5200 Ballblazer video


It's a moot point for me though because I don't ever plan on playing any version of Ballblazer. It's just not my kind of game. It's a nice tech demo though.

Wow, even the incomplete Atari 2600 version of Ballblazer looks smoother than the NES version. Dang, didn't expect that.

[Rob2600]

I just watched this YouTube user's series of 7800 game videos:

Atari 7800 Quick Clips playlist

My friends and I never had or played a 7800 growing up and I've only played it briefly as an adult, so my observations are based on the videos I linked to above and a couple others.

1. I don't know why people claim the 7800 handles scrolling poorly. Choplifter!, Commando, Dark Chambers, Desert Falcon, Ninja Golf, and Xevious seem to scroll perfectly fine. Am I missing something?

2. Some 7800 games look good, on par with (or fairly close to) early NES games: Asteroids, Commando, Desert Falcon, Donkey Kong, Mario Bros., Ninja Golf, Pole Position II, and Xevious. Dark Chambers and Scrapyard Dog look decent, but have that low-res/stretched-out/blocky 7800 and C64 look to them that I can't stand.

3. Ballblazer and Xenophobe actually look better than the NES versions. Title Match Pro Wrestling looks better than many NES wrestling games...in still shots. In motion, the animation is almost non-existent and the game itself is one of the worst. The background and sprites are impressive though.

4. Some games look acceptable, but fairly outdated, as if they were ported from the 5200 or ColecoVision: Centipede, Crack'ed, Crossbow, Dig Dug, Donkey Kong Junior, Double Dragon, Food Fight, Galaga, Hat Trick, Impossible Mission, Joust, Ms. Pac-Man, and Robotron: 2084. I'm not saying these games could've been done on those old consoles, but they have that old, outdated, low-res and/or low-color look to them.

5. Some games look downright horrible, like One-on-One Basketball and RealSports Baseball.

6. A few games I've seen, like Asteroids, Commando, Desert Falcon, and Xevious, don't have that 7800/C64 low-res, wide-pixel look to them. If more 7800 games looked like these, I'd be more impressed with the console overall.

7. The music and sound effects in almost every 7800 game are obnoxious and grating. If I had owned a 7800 growing up, my parents would've definitely forced me to keep the TV muted during game sessions.


So, would Super Mario Bros. 3 be possible on the 7800? I don't know, but I'm inclined to say no. However, based on games like Ballblazer, Commando, Desert Falcon, Ninja Golf, Xenophobe, and Xevious, I think the 7800 would've been able to handle respectable ports of some second or third generation (1986-1988) NES games, if Atari had put much more research, development, money, and support into the 7800. With some extra chips in each cartridge (like many NES games), I think the 7800 could've seen fairly respectable versions of third-party titles like Rush 'n Attack, Contra, Mega Man, Legendary Wings, Gun.Smoke, Ring King, etc. (assuming Nintendo didn't have exclusive deals with those third-parties).

It seems like the 7800 had a good amount of untapped potential...but maybe not quite enough to pull off those later, more advanced NES games like SMB 3, TMNT II and III, Track & Field II, and Castlevania III.