Snowballs,
Is there anything that you can look at and not point out the faults of it? I mean, almost all of your post are about. In fact, I dont think I've seen a post that you made that didnt originate with a fault of something.

Anyways, for all of you who think these things are not newsworthy, please go make some news for us.
-Matt

>> Is there anything that you can look at
>> and not point out the faults of it? I mean,
>> almost all of your post are about. In fact,
>> I dont think I've seen a post that you made
>> that didnt originate with a fault of something.

You haven't looked at a majority of my posts then. :) Frankly, I don't like it when people use words/terms that are misleading. I just felt like I should correct the record on this, and Nick said I was right and he fixed it. Enough said.

So my word is law now? I'm flattered =)

--BlueCalx

Sure, and hell froze over an hour ago.. :)

I was just pointing out that you thought what I said was correct, so you changed the headline of the news item.

If anything, my word is law. :-)

This explains why your IRC nick used to be Allah :D

--b00clax!

I guess so.. and is your IRC nickname "BlueCalx" because your calculator is blue (TI-81) ? :)

Actually it's a reference to the British techno band Aphex Twin, you uncultured fool, you :)
Consult www.aphextwin.org for more info.

--BlueCalx

Ahh.. thank you. I now consider myself cultured.

I've looked at a majority of your posts... I'd say A) You are often one of the first posters and B) You posts have some nitpicking or simply incorrect point to make and C) they are almost ALWAYS finding fault.

It's easier to destroy than it is to create. Go program a little ASM program and then you'll get some respect instead of being a board troll... And make some positive news...

Wow, really? That must have taken a long time, since I've been posting comments here ever since the news system was created.

I only nitpick when something isn't correct. What would be the point of nitpicking when ticalc.org is doing a good job?

Why don't you go work for a TI-related website for 2 years and then come talk to me.

Don't worry, my "news" will come in due time.

Seems like you have been nitpicking alot since march or whenever it was...
- Matt

Hrm.. maybe thats just a coincidence, because thats when they started to make a lot of mistakes. :) (I mean, come on now... posting a hacked version of ZTetris isn't your average human error/mistake...)

(Ok I think this thread should end here.)

Since the Gameboy and the 8X caulators have the same processor, why can't there be a port of the Gameboy games to the calulator? All you have to do is get the ROMS off the net and there you go. I have limited knowledge of this, but isn't plausible?

The GameBoy and the 82, 83(+), 85, and 86 all share the same processor (Z80). However, this question was brought up about nine months ago when SMQ came out for the 89. They actually can. It is the same processor, and therefore, the same programming language. Although they may carry the same processor, the calculator does not have the various graphics chips and video accelerators that the GB has. Thus, every bit of code in the calculator version *must* go through the processor instead of being sent to specialized chips that handle different things. If one were to port a GB game to the calculator, gameplay would be drastically slowed down.

Another problem occurs: Where does the monolithic game get stored? TI calcs were not designed with cartridge slots included. I'm not sure how big a GB game would be, somebody verify the details, please, but if anything, only a few games could fit into the memory.

I'll search through the archives here to find the exact discussion.

~ferich

I found it. Click on my web page link to go to the article. It's in the middle.

ANYway, here's a part of it...

<<Piloter wrote:

An interesting point. However, bear in mind that (*warning, CSE major within hailing distance* *Shields up! Jam all frequencies!* *Sir, he already is.*) most actual emulation involves software-level code to mimic hardware. I suppose it's POSSIBLE that Nintendo happened to do basic IO and processing for their Gameboy Z80 like TI did, but I think that the Gameboy might have had other chips specially for graphics work (scaling, tiling, scrolling) .. .the question is if it's possible to somehow write code NOT for full emulation but to change TI's instructions into what a Gameboy would work with. *blink* Let me clarify that. Using a Z80's resources to fully software - emulate a Z80 is like trying to dismantle your computer to make a monitor, you may be able to, but then where's the computer? Full software emulation would take all the resources of the Z80 and leave MAYBE a few tenths of mhz free for processing the actual Gameboy ROM image. (Like trying to run NeoGeo games with full sound on a 486-33 with 32 megs ram. It can no doubt be /done/, but you'll get about 1 FPS.) Basically what I'm trying to say is, "Is it possible for somebody to write translation protocols from Nintendo to TI?" Of course, the actual size of the ROMs becomes an issue too. Greyscale assembly stuff is BIG.
If this made little sense and annoys people, I'm sorry, I'm just trying to convey some of the issues I see as potential problems for this. (Yes, just out of curiosity I would be /very/ interested in this project.) Feel free to mail me if you like.
--Piloter, signing off

20 January 1999, 16:38 GMT>>

<<Eric Newman wrote:

But you have to deal with all the nastiness that goes with a recompiler. Meaning all the issues that are mentioned (graphics/sound calls that should be there, but aren't.. Handling all odd quirks of the original hardware)...
All these add up to a large amount of effort, and essentially recoding portions of each game on an individual basis.
Interpretation is a lost cause, and I don't think one could do a dynamic recompiler quickly and efficiently enough in the 10mhz available on a TI-89 or 92.
As for memory space... That'd definitely be an issue, but perhaps something like the Expander II could be used? Something to consider.
As a final note...
If one has the skill for this, one would be able to do new games from scratch anyhow, so why bother? (Well, I'm sure there's a few games out there someone will point to as Worth It, but we're already getting items like Zelda and such, so that list's going to get shorter with time.)

23 January 1999, 13:18 GMT>>

Hope this clears it up a little...

~ferich

There are several simple reasons why Game Boy games cannot be "ported" to a TI calculator.

Z80 calcs:

1) The GB does _NOT_ use a Z80! It uses a specialized processor that is similiar to the Z80. It has a few instructions that the Z80 does not have (SWAP, STOP, etc.) and is missing many instructions that the Z80 has. It has more 8-bit memory addressing modes, and no 16-bit modes. It has no index registers, and no shadow registers. This makes it essentially a RISC version of the Z80.

2) The GB has a completely different memory layout than the calc. The calcs have permanent ROM pages that cannot be swapped (and if they can, not for RAM), making it impossible to run a GB game.

3) The GB has completely different hardware. It has hardware sprites, sound, link port, buttons, etc. The hardware is accessed through I/O addresses in memory, whereas the calc uses ports. It would be impossible to emulate the hardware in real time, much less run the code unchanged.

4) There is not NEARLY enough RAM to hold a GB ROM image. Even the smallest GB cart is 32k. The TI-86 is the only calc that could hold even the smallest cart. The 32k carts are games like Tetris and such (though Tetris may well be larger, I don't have the ROM image handy). A native version like ZTetris is 3.5k. And is just as fun :) The more popular games are huge. Zelda is 512k (Zelda DX is 1mb) and Wario Land 2 is 2mb.

5) Hmm, I think the first four are enough, don't you? :)

68k calcs:

1) The CPU is too slow to emulate the Z80-like CPU in real time. While the 68k is a quite powerful CPU, that does not make it good for emulation. It subdivides clock cycles, as on earlier x86 CPU's, making it quite tough to emulate a CPU like the Z80 that executes small instructions fast (i.e. emulating RISC on a CISC is hard). This is not an impossible obstacle, like all of the Z80 ones, but makes it extremely unlikely. By dynamically recompiling the code on the computer into 68k (it's executed in ROM, so self-modifying code is not a problem), it might be possible to get it fast enough for slower games. But anyone with enough skill to do that is emulating more fun stuff, like N64 or Dreamcast :)

2) The hardware is completely different, and would have to be emulated in real time. Even if it were possible to overcome the speed obstacle, there would be problems with the display. Just as there are hardware tricks on the calcs that let them display grayscale, similiar tricks can be done with the GB hardware and are used by many games. This would be impossible to emulate on the calc.

3) Even though the 89 and 92+ have a lot of memory, a single cart could fill it, and there are even some carts that wouldn't fit.

I tried to keep this explanation as simple as possible, with just saying "it's impossible, everyone knows that" for no reason. If this explanation is too technical for you, then realize how complicated it would be to do that. If it were that easy, someone would have done it before :)

A Z80 system has already been emulated on the TI89. It's called the 'ZX Sinclair Spectrum 48', and it has a Z80. Gameboy emulation can be half speed on a 286 with NO$GMB, why not half speed on a 68000?

hey uh this may be TOO on-topic for soem of you, but is anybody else having problems with the controls? i am because the bar moves to fast, it is kinda hard to get it right where you want it.

I have this problem too you have to just tap the buttons really lightly and usually it will work but it is still too fast. But in general it is a fun game.

Wow, a useless game...sigh. Hey that black hole game looks cool. How about a redneck game for 83 plus or drug cartel or how about a visual periodic table. Sigh... i know C++, VB, Basic, HTML, Java... SO HOW DO I PROG ION GAMeS FOR THE 83 plus? AnSWER ME!

bea$ty

It's not useless. If you ported the same game you would have a little more respect for the people who port and make these games. I'm sure if you ever programed basic you programed something more "useless" then what you called "a useless game." Again I say its people like you that cause people to stop porting and programing. In other words "SHUT UP."