🚀 go-pugleaf

ho...@panix.com (Homi!) writes:
>A friend of mine and I have a bet going. Neither of us currently own PCs,
>though I am planning on getting a 486 this year. He has stated that he
>does not believe that most IBM games <read: released within the last year
>or 2> utilize a 256 color mode, and may use far fewer colors, ie 128 or
>even 64. I argue that it would then no longer be a VGA game. Anyone wanna
>help me settle this bet? :) 

You are wrong in saying that games that use less than 256 colour modes are
not VGA, but you are correct in saying that most games are in VGA.  (EGA
is rarely supported and CGA nearly extinct).

Alistair
-- 
Email A.D....@bradford.ac.uk

Hi!
Okay, from what I've seen, back in the ooold days (when cga was master),
4 color in Low-res is good.  Now, vga is the standard.
First of all, if the game is done through programming only (no digitized
graphics, no hand-drawn pictures, and that sophisticated things), then
less than 256 color is possible.  For instance, Thexder 2 (Hmm, I know this
game is old, but that's an example), if u put it in MCGA mode, it will
use some colors, but much less than 256.  
However, if u digitized something, to make it NOT 256 is hard, unless u
specify that in the scanning program.
By the way, only vga is capable of producing >16 color (in graphics), so
if a game uses 17 color, well, it's using vga card (I know that some special
modes can be forced, even on cga u can get 16 in graphics, and 32 in ega, but
that's another story.. :))

Hope this will answer, and sorry, u lose your bet.

In article <2h1ouv$l...@panix.com>, Homi! <ho...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>A friend of mine and I have a bet going. Neither of us currently own PCs,
>though I am planning on getting a 486 this year. He has stated that he
>does not believe that most IBM games <read: released within the last year
>or 2> utilize a 256 color mode, and may use far fewer colors, ie 128 or
>even 64. I argue that it would then no longer be a VGA game. Anyone wanna
>help me settle this bet? :) 
>Email only please, since I dont want to spark a flame war, as if there was
>a lack of flames in any of these newsgroups.
>-- 
 
 The way you both state it, you are both technically wrong and neither
 would actually win.

 1)  Most games released today use 256 colors in the game.  A good example
 of the contrary is Syndicate which uses a 640x400x16 screen which is
 pretty good anyway (320x200x256 is standard vga and is what most games
 run under.)  As far as I know, that mode is used in most games.  Take 
 a look at the difference between a sierra game on the IBM in VGA and on
 the Amiga (I noticed a huge difference between the computers in Leisure
 Suit Larry V in terms of colors)
 2)  There might be a few games out there that only use a few of the 
 256 colors, but I can't think of any off hand that are recent.

 3)  You are wrong in assuming that if it has less than 256 colors, it
 is not vga.  Syndicate above is just one example.  Actually, any
 "legal" mode (not hacked mode) that has more than 16 colors is VGA.
 EGA legally only had 16 colors on the screen at once.  There are of course
 tricks to get more out of it...

 Steven

In article <2hc36e$8...@news.acns.nwu.edu> sger...@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Steven Gershenfeld) writes:

> 
> The way you both state it, you are both technically wrong and neither
> would actually win.

> 1)  Most games released today use 256 colors in the game.  A good example
> of the contrary is Syndicate which uses a 640x400x16 screen which is
> pretty good anyway (320x200x256 is standard vga and is what most games
> run under.)  

 Sure you dont mean 640x480x16? That is a valid ega resolution.

> 3)  You are wrong in assuming that if it has less than 256 colors, it
> is not vga.  Syndicate above is just one example.  Actually, any
> "legal" mode (not hacked mode) that has more than 16 colors is VGA.
> EGA legally only had 16 colors on the screen at once.  There are of course
> tricks to get more out of it...

 You are (basically) correct in stating that more than 16 colors is vga, but 
you forget that more than 320x200 doesn't have to be.
 640x480x16 is *NOT* vga!! 
 What I really wonder is wether the man meant less than 256 colors *on 
screen* or less than 256 color *palette*.

gun...@dhhalden.no

-=::Peel a man that looks like an onion, 
    and I'll show you a man that looks like a peeled onion.

Spelling errors and bad grammar are centered intentionally.

In article <gunnarh.14...@dhhalden.no> gun...@dhhalden.no (WonderBoy) writes:
>In article <2hc36e$8...@news.acns.nwu.edu> sger...@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Steven Gershenfeld) writes:
>
>> 
>> The way you both state it, you are both technically wrong and neither
>> would actually win.
>
>> 1)  Most games released today use 256 colors in the game.  A good example
>> of the contrary is Syndicate which uses a 640x400x16 screen which is
>> pretty good anyway (320x200x256 is standard vga and is what most games
>> run under.)  
>
> Sure you dont mean 640x480x16? That is a valid ega resolution.

Nope, he means 640x400x16.  Equally valid, just not used that often as pixels 
are kind of funky.

>> 3)  You are wrong in assuming that if it has less than 256 colors, it
>> is not vga.  Syndicate above is just one example.  Actually, any
>> "legal" mode (not hacked mode) that has more than 16 colors is VGA.
>> EGA legally only had 16 colors on the screen at once.  There are of course
>> tricks to get more out of it...
>
> You are (basically) correct in stating that more than 16 colors is vga, but 
>you forget that more than 320x200 doesn't have to be.
> 640x480x16 is *NOT* vga!! 

Wrong again.  Here's a list of standard resolutions as best as I remeber:

Height | Width | # Colors | Name
-------+-------+----------+------
320    | 200   | 4        | CGA
320    | 200   | 16       | EGA
320    | 200   | 64       | PGA (Professional Graphics Adapter (huh?)
320    | 200   | 256      | MCGA (NOT VGA!!!!!)
640    | 350   | 16       | EGA
640    | 400   | 256      | VGA (not IBM standard)
640    | 480   | 16       | VGA (the first release)
640    | 480   | 256      | VGA (S-VGA if you're really picky)
800    | 600   | 16+      | S-VGA
any and all resolutions higher are considered S-VGA
-------+-------+----------+-------

320x200x256 is used mist often because it is fast, and there are four 'pages' 
of screen memory.  Most programs draw the image on a background page, flip to 
that page, draw the next image on a different background page, and continue on 
like that. (that way you don't see the images being put together).

Some games use 640x400x255 (usually only useing 16 colors) or 640x350x16 
because both have TWO pages with which to flip back and fourth on.

640x480x16/256 only has ONE page (on 90% of VGA systems) with which to draw 
on, and requires more work for the programmer to get it to look good.

>gun...@dhhalden.no

Richard R. Ward
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| "The box...you opened it.  We came. It's a means to summon us - Cenobites. |
| Explorers in the further regions of experience.  Demons to some, angels to |
| others. ... No tears please. It's a waste of good suffering." - Pinhead    |
| rrw...@netcom.com                                                          |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

In article <gunnarh.14...@dhhalden.no> gun...@dhhalden.no (WonderBoy) writes:
>
> Sure you dont mean 640x480x16? That is a valid ega resolution.
>

Huh?  I thought EGA topped out at 640x350 because there's only 32k addressable.
Meaning 640x480x16 _is_ a vga (only) resolution.

-scott

In article <CJu3r...@world.std.com> s...@world.std.com (Scott P Evernden) writes:

>In article <gunnarh.14...@dhhalden.no> gun...@dhhalden.no (WonderBoy)
>writes:
>>
>> Sure you dont mean 640x480x16? That is a valid ega resolution.
>>

>Huh?  I thought EGA topped out at 640x350 because there's only 32k
>addressable.
>Meaning 640x480x16 _is_ a vga (only) resolution.

Ooops. Sorry about that one. I messed up the numbers.
 My point remains the same though..

gun...@dhhalden.no

-=::Peel a man that looks like an onion, 
    and I'll show you a man that looks like a peeled onion.

Spelling errors and bad grammar are centered intentionally.