Cave and the slowdown

[THE]

On a closed system like an arcade PCB you may have a lot more control as on crappy PC system or modern consoles with running an OS in the background.

Taito Type X and all the variants would like to have a word with you.

I don't understand...

[robivy64]

I've overclocked the 68000 CPU on an ESPrade board (to 20 MHz from 16), the slowdown was nearly non-existent.

Officially debunked.

[THE]

I've overclocked the 68000 CPU on an ESPrade board (to 20 MHz from 16), the slowdown was nearly non-existent.

Officially debunked.

100% controlled and programmed slowdown would have stayed regardless how much the CPU is overclocked. Well until it got smoked

[emphatic]

Well, as the ESPRADE PCB isn't supposed to be overclocked I don't really see your point.

[THE]

Well, as the ESPRADE PCB isn't supposed to be overclocked I don't really see your point.

Well the point is some people think Cave is programming the slowdown intentionally and in a way in they can 100% control. Which is wrong. The slowdown itself is of course intentional as they decided to design it like that in the way as they just put a certain amount of enemies at a certain part of the "map" and let them spawn so many bullets that it will slowdown.

[RHE]

Looks like some people here take the term 'intentional' rather loosey. The way CAVE does it means the hardware controls their design and not them controling the hardware to make exactly the design they want. Even with trying to build the game around it, there's always the chance something unexpteded happens, like a player that refuses to shoot. They can easily overcome all these issues by programming the slowdows intentionally. Now the question is why does they refuse it? Ultimatly only CAVE themself can answer it.

However, It's not bad design or programming, but not very good either. It's just not really what I consider a well impletend feature. To say its intentional just because it works for a instance does not proof the subject, because it works with every game anyway. With danmakus better then with most other shooters though.

[emphatic]

Well, the view of a programmer and the view of a high level game player hardly fall in the same ball park. If you program something to be 100%, how can you know that this will be the same for ALL players, 100% of the time? What CAVE's done with their games, is tweaking them after some really skilled players have tested their games. I you play a game long enough on a high level (focusing on all aspects of the game) you'll find things that you can use to give you higher score or otherwise exploit the game. If hardware slowdowns are different for different players, it can be utilized for different play styles. This will IMHO give a long lasting experience as the player's evolve with the game play.

[RHE]

Well, the view of a programmer and the view of a high level game player hardly fall in the same ball park. If you program something to be 100%, how can you know that this will be the same for ALL players, 100% of the time?

By adjusting the speed of the bullets etc. with a rank system? Technically the slowdowns is always the same then. Unless theres a bug in the code of course.

What CAVE's done with their games, is tweaking them after some really skilled players have tested their games. I you play a game long enough on a high level (focusing on all aspects of the game) you'll find things that you can use to give you higher score or otherwise exploit the game. If hardware slowdowns are different for different players, it can be utilized for different play styles. This will IMHO give a long lasting experience as the player's evolve with the game play.

No offense, but this is exactly the fanboy talk were talking about here. Of course you can use different speeds for different players for allowing different play styles, but the chances that this works perfectly by using a hardwares limits are pretty low - programm it and it works for sure. So, putting the slowdowns in the code is the only way to make it 100% perfect for some high level play testers. Putting in another line of code, like some sort of rank system that decides to make less or more slowdowns for another kind of player, is the better choice again.

I don't get why it's so hard for some CAVE fans to admit these games are not perfect. It's not a shame to make something that's not perfect.

[E. Randy Dupre]

Or course bad programming is a bit harsh, but they can do better w/o much programming effort.

There are so many lulz in a comment like that - and the many other examples within this thread - coming from you that I don't even know where to begin, other than to say: don't ever stop posting here, yours are some of the most hilarious posts on the board.

Unintentionally hilarious. Kind of fitting, really.

[emphatic]

Or course bad programming is a bit harsh, but they can do better w/o much programming effort.

There are so many lulz in a comment like that - and the many other examples within this thread - coming from you that I don't even know where to begin, other than to say: don't ever stop posting here, yours are some of the most hilarious posts on the board.

Unintentionally hilarious. Kind of fitting, really.

Man. I feel like a troll now.

[RHE]

Or course bad programming is a bit harsh, but they can do better w/o much programming effort.

There are so many lulz in a comment like that - and the many other examples within this thread - coming from you that I don't even know where to begin, other than to say: don't ever stop posting here, yours are some of the most hilarious posts on the board.

Unintentionally hilarious. Kind of fitting, really.

To hear this form a person that does crap with a game for a long period that he doesn't know at all is purly blashpemic. Anyway, arguments are arguments, it doesn't matter what person articulates them as long the argument holds something truth.

[PC Engine Fan X!]

And I guess I don't understand how you can call it a "bug" as you can play the ROM unthrottled in MAME and still have the same slowdown effect. It's obviously programmed in. I think it was genius to take a hardware limitation and make it into an exciting "signature event" of the genre.

AFAIR this was proofed wrong by a member here. He overclocked the m68k and got rid of the slowdown in DDP PCB or something.

It was fellow shmupper robivy64 who overclocked an ESP.Ra.De. PCB and got it to run without any slowdown whatsoever. Interesting stuff indeed. ^_~

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[Taylor]

Kind of irrelevant though, the discussion was not about why the slowdown occurs but whether or not it was intended from a design POV, with THE citing the fact they have smooth transitions as evidence it was not. We have established that, yes, obviously it is intended.

Now we're arguing whether this is bad programming as the NG:DEV TEAM would do it better than the stupid, excellent Cave. And if that doesn't make any sense, you’re a hopeless Cave fanboy.

[RHE]

Where exactly is the proof that it was intended? Looks like I missed it.

For me its cleary not intentionally, because on a different hardware with more power they couldn't get the same effect at the same point for the same game. Its just that in fits the gameplay pretty well by conicidence or rather by logical consequence. the more CAVE cares about this the more they should programm it.

Looks like danamkus programmers are the only programmer in the whole world who can allow hardware slowdowns with the games they're programming. And it only works, because they always use the same hardware for the same game.

[E. Randy Dupre]

To hear this form a person that does crap with a game for a long period that he doesn't know at all is purly blashpemic.

Consulting a dictionary might not be a bad idea at this point. Unless you believe yourself to be some kind of god. That'd explain a lot.

Anyway, arguments are arguments, it doesn't matter what person articulates them as long the argument holds something truth.

Which is, again, hilarious, as your argument here doesn't appear to hold any truth. Where's *your* proof?

[dan76]

Cave make very good arcade games, many people would argue that some of them are near perfect. They know how to manipulate/push/overload the hardware to produce slowdown. Whats the problem here? You'd rather them program the slowdown than have it come from pushing hardware? Well, it's a tough life - somehow you'll have to learn to live with it.

[RHE]

To hear this form a person that does crap with a game for a long period that he doesn't know at all is purly blashpemic.

Consulting a dictionary might not be a bad idea at this point. Unless you believe yourself to be some kind of god. That'd explain a lot.

No clue what you're talking about. Why should I put out a dictionary and why do you think I'm god?

Anyway, arguments are arguments, it doesn't matter what person articulates them as long the argument holds something truth.

Which is, again, hilarious, as your argument here doesn't appear to hold any truth. Where's *your* proof?

Actually, that overclocking the CPU thingy proves the slowdowns are not part of the programm. To have something that's not part of a programm, means to have less control over it. Read it carefully, these slowdowns are not part of the programm. And a game is a programm. So they're not part of the game, in the very sense. So probably CAVE is accepting the slowdowns for their games because it makes the high amount of bullets easier to dodge, making them intentionally means they have to programm it.

Now it's up to player to accept it and to be fine with it, but technically it's not intentionally. Because the hardware controls the design, but normally it should the other way around. To make something 100% intentional means to have 100% conrol over it, I don't need a dictionary to proof this.

[brokenhalo]

For me its cleary not intentionally, because on a different hardware with more power they couldn't get the same effect at the same point for the same game.

but when cave programs a game, they program it to run on one specific board. your argument that the game would run differently on a different board seems truthful, but cave never intended it to run on another board. therefore the slowdown is quite intentional.

[emphatic]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy

[RHE]

For me its cleary not intentionally, because on a different hardware with more power they couldn't get the same effect at the same point for the same game.

but when cave programs a game, they program it to run on one specific board. Your argument that the game would run differently on a different board seems truthful, but cave never intended it to run on another board. therefore the slowdown is quite intentional.

I'm fine to say they are QUITE 'intentional' too. But CAVE is a pro, and they do countless games like this, I think they can EASILY do better and make it truly intentional. The fact they leave it to the hardware probably means they don't give a dam about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy

I see, thanks.

[emphatic]

Actually, that overclocking the CPU thingy proves the slowdowns are not part of the programm. To have something that's not part of a programm, means to have less control over it. Read it carefully, these slowdowns are not part of the programm. And a game is a programm. So they're not part of the game, in the very sense. So probably CAVE is accepting the slowdowns for their games because it makes the high amount of bullets easier to dodge, making them intentionally means they have to programm it.

Now it's up to player to accept it and to be fine with it, but technically it's not intentionally. Because the hardware controls the design, but normally it should the other way around. To make something 100% intentional means to have 100% conrol over it, I don't need a dictionary to proof this.

So where in the CAVE games do they specify that you are supposed to run the game on modified hardware, or different hardware than they ship the game with? They USE the way the hardware throttles the speed of the game (the music doesn't struggle when the games slow down, as this is in no way a desired effect) by programming it that way.

If I were to take a copy of YOUR game and try running it on a 486 PC, it wouldn't be likely to run at all = your programming fucking sucks.

[RHE]

How do they control the point where the hardware throttles? Or do they build a CPU that has its limits exaclty there where they need it for their games?

[Matsunaga]

Cave makes better games than you, stop wining.

[RHE]

Cave makes better games than you, stop wining.

I should stop winning or whining?

[nikkos010]

How do they control the point where the hardware throttles? Or do they build a CPU that has its limits exaclty there where they need it for their games?

uh, by intentionally putting a shitload of sprites on the screen? This is hardware-specific coding right?

Did we just do a second loop?

[RHE]

How do they control the point where the hardware throttles? Or do they build a CPU that has its limits exaclty there where they need it for their games?

uh, by intentionally putting a shitload of sprites on the screen? This is hardware-specific coding right?

No it's not. And the designer doesn't control the point of the slowdown, as it's the hardware that does it. I mean controling means, to be able to adjust the point where the game should thottle and how much it should thottle. To make it intentionally they either have to design the programm or the hardware in the favor of the slowdowns. Choosing the hardware means to have less control over it again.

I consider this a interesting subject, but this board doesn't seem to be the right place for such a discussion for obvious reasons. The most important thing here is that both CAVE and most of their players accept or even welcome these slowdoens, but that doesn't make me believe they are 100% intentional.

[lgb]

CAVE made these boards or at least picked out their guts so they're obviously going to make games that fit within the capabilities

little more needs to be said

[nikkos010]

This is worse than those old perceived reality argument. "Is the red you see different than the red he sees? maybe he sees yellow but calls it red?

[lgb]

but those are always amusing, this is getting boring and RHE keeps dodging all of our bullet points with looping, at least he can't fire while he's looping

[E. Randy Dupre]

To hear this form a person that does crap with a game for a long period that he doesn't know at all is purly blashpemic.

Consulting a dictionary might not be a bad idea at this point. Unless you believe yourself to be some kind of god. That'd explain a lot.

No clue what you're talking about. Why should I put out a dictionary and why do you think I'm god?

1. Don't attempt to use words that you don't understand the meaning of.

2. Because you seem to believe that you can do no wrong.

This, if you failed to get even the basic gist of my original post, is why it's amusing to see you constantly attempting to deflect criticism away from your own releases by slating those of a developer/publisher that most members of this community have a great deal of respect for.