3 ms·
Nope. Marathon was higher resolution than Doom and it ran on 68020 Macs. Nothing to do with processor architecture.
by KerrAvon 3y ago
Nope. Marathon was higher resolution than Doom and it ran on 68020 Macs. Nothing to do with processor architecture.
- Zardoz84 3y agoThere is an actual Doom clone game that runs in a A1200 and has equal or better graphics than the original Doom. And, I say game. Not a demo.
- badpun 3y agoWhat's it called?
- logicprog 3y agoI think they probably mean Dread? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UE4nOYc0RkA https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UE4nOYc0RkA
- badpun 3y agoThis looks like a much worse Wolfenstein clone... No 3D as far as I see (all rooms are of the same height, the map is just a 2d maze), no textures on floors on ceilings. Not to mention much lower resolution than wolf3d - the graphics are barely legible.
- tialaramex 3y agoWolf3D is just (a 3D view onto) a simple grid shape. So this is doing a bunch of stuff Wolf3D can't do. The linked video talks about (but does not demonstrate) full variable heights which would be even closer to Doom, but this is already able to provide a sense of space and visual variety absent from Wolf3D.
- justsomehnguy 3y agoAfter meat, mustard.