4 ms·

I think this is a video of it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7h3H-_8N_o http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7h3H-_8N_o If that really is vic-20 hardware... that'

• mynameishere 14y ago
  I think the biggest constraint on a vic-20 would have been memory. The apple II had the same CPU with some fairly impressive 3D-esque games. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQLFwUu5cTY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQLFwUu5cTY ...but yeah, I actually knew someone with a VIC-20 and the software for it was truly abysmal even at the time.
  • kenjackson 14y ago
    The Vic20 had some really good software. I still remember Gorf on it. I had a skiing game that was quite impressive for a game that used less than 3.5KB of RAM (yes that is 3.5 kilobytes).
    • caf 14y ago
      I think the first electronic circuit I ever designed from scratch was an in-line "autofire box" for my VIC-20 joystick so I could kill at Gorf ;)
  • vidarh 14y ago
    Skyfox ran just fine on the C64 too. You're probably right the main limitation is memory. Skyfox was written around the constraints of these platforms from the outset, and if you have a little bit of extra memory to waste there are tons of methods you can use to do less work. On the C64 at least (not idea about the Apple II, as I don't think I ever even saw one in person - they were not widespread in Europe), custom character sets (so you could move just a few characters to move an object), hardware sprites and careful animation of small subsets of characters in the custom character sets, coupled with multiple versions of these character sets with pre-scaled objects were all common ways of handling 3D. Only a very few games ever tried doing 3D "properly" with bitmap graphics, and they uniformly looked much worse. E.g. Elite.