Banner
Views: 865,407,365
Time:
10 users online: HandsomeMan, Idrinkgrapesoda, Infinity, Jolpengammler, monkey03297, PokerFace, rezephos, ShrooboidBrat, TorbiBoy, VLSkoot - Guests: 37 - Bots: 64 Users: 47,948 (2,095 active)
Latest: Dpyeo
Tip: Switch palace switches normally disappear if you replay the level. However, if you insert them as direct Map16 and use the hex-edit at $00EEB2 in the ROM map, you can replay the level without a problem.Not logged in.
Mad Scientist - ASM Contest [Final Results]
Forum Index - Sunken Ghost Ship - Old Contests & Events - Mad Scientist - ASM Contest [Final Results]
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 » Link
Originally posted by DeppySlide
Without going into Lunar Magic and messing with the level myself, I can only make assumptions, but it feels like it'd be easy to break if the player does something unintended, or if the designer does something screwy.

I dislike a bit that you made those assumptions without looking. It is a given that with such a sprite things may screw up if misused by the designer, but the worst effect I can think of is water spreading indefinitely to a direction and creating cutoff if there is no floor (and that can be fixed easily). Even when water hits the edge of the screen I haven't encountered anything as serious as a crash, but I have only had a week's time to test it out, so I could be wrong.

If the sprite is used correctly, I don't think the player can possibly break anything. I'm pretty certain my example level isn't breakable, although I admit it is rather limited.

I'll use this opportunity to explain how my resource works:



Thanks to everyone for the votes, and congrats to Darolac for winning this round! You definitely deserve it, I can think of many cool uses for these bubbles.

I'm not sure if I'll enter this round due to lack of knowledge, but I'll give learning an honest shot.
Originally posted by anonimzwx
What do you mean with bugged out?

it bugged out. it sat in place for a while, then swam to the corner of the screen and bugged out. i genuinely have no guesses at what the intended behaviour was supposed to be because it did this every time i reloaded
Originally posted by Hobz
Originally posted by anonimzwx
What do you mean with bugged out?

it bugged out. it sat in place for a while, then swam to the corner of the screen and bugged out. i genuinely have no guesses at what the intended behaviour was supposed to be because it did this every time i reloaded


I think he was wondering what "bugged out" means

allow shy guy emojis in post footers you cowards!
(Rising Tide ASM here)

Whoops! Definitely misunderstood what judging was gunna look like. In retrospect it probably should've been obvious that the code itself wasn't going to be shared, a ton of customization options I included ended up going to waste. Oh well. People look interested in playing with it though, so I'll post the file as submitted to the judges here.

https://bin.smwcentral.net/u/2186/Scrolling%2BTides.rar

I'm usually wary of actually putting anything I make to site because I never really bother to optimize my code, but considering I was expecting this code to be public anyways, I guess its fine.

Not sure if I have a good idea for Round 2. Might be skipping it.
For Round 2, is usage of the color math registers a criterion or a suggestion? For example, if I write a color filter using the CPU but don't do anything with registers 2123-2132, does that count? I think using only the regs for the effect would be quite limiting and probably not lead to anything not seen before. It can definitely be combined with other things to get more interesting results though. I can't be more specific due to anonymity, but basically does doing math with the palette count as doing color math for the purposes of the contest?

allow shy guy emojis in post footers you cowards!
Originally posted by Von Fahrenheit
For Round 2, is usage of the color math registers a criterion or a suggestion? For example, if I write a color filter using the CPU but don't do anything with registers 2123-2132, does that count? I think using only the regs for the effect would be quite limiting and probably not lead to anything not seen before. It can definitely be combined with other things to get more interesting results though. I can't be more specific due to anonymity, but basically does doing math with the palette count as doing color math for the purposes of the contest?

Colour maths is colour maths and what you described isn't.
It still doesn't mean you can't make interesting effects with colour maths, though, especially combined with something else. In fact, combining colour maths with something is interesting and I surely encourage that. Heck, I even have three possibly interesting ideas for colour maths, one of which I had even created (but not finished) for a CLDC level.

--------------------
Okay, my layout looks ugly.
Could be windowing color math?
------------------------------------------------------

Youtube
Twitter
SMWControlLibX GitHub
My Discord Server
Originally posted by anonimzwx
Could be windowing color math?

On its own, not really, but they can be combined together.

--------------------
Okay, my layout looks ugly.
Originally posted by MarioFanGamer
Colour maths is colour maths and what you described isn't.


I would argue that doing math with palettes is doing math with colors and thus is, by very definition, color math.

If that does not meat the criteria intended by the rules, I'd say they should be updated to state "you have to use the color math registers".

--------------------
Feel free to visit my website/blog - it's updated rarely, but it looks pretty cool!
If you simulate color math CPU side but don't use the registers, does that count? The reason I'm asking about this is not arbitrary. Let's say, for example, that someone wanted to fade in a color filter rather than having it just pop up. Using the color math registers, this is impossible, as it will snap to from 100% to 50% opacity. What if someone wanted a color filter that does something other than the options allowed by the registers (add, sub, add/2, sub/2)? You would need to do stuff CPU side, and you'd probably want to turn off the regs due to interference...

I take it that IF these are not allowed, then... well, I don't really know, I guess. Is it really about color math at that point? It seems to me like it will be about making a gimmick and using the color math regs at the same time, rather than actually doing something with color math because of how limited the options are. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it does make me wonder what the point of even requiring color math regs is.

My point is that if we're allowed to do stuff CPU side we will have more avenues to explore creativity and make use of mathematical understanding of color. You simply don't get that when the PPU does everything for you.

allow shy guy emojis in post footers you cowards!
Okay, to avoid any chaos, let's put this round on hold. I have created a poll with the options to continue with the ruleset, turn this round into colours in general (so CG-RAM and fixed colour become fair play) or just use a different theme altogether.
The poll ends at 23th October, at 18:00 UTC.


I'll still answer the last two posts:
Originally posted by RPG Hacker
Originally posted by MarioFanGamer
Colour maths is colour maths and what you described isn't.


I would argue that doing math with palettes is doing math with colors and thus is, by very definition, color math.

If that does not meat the criteria intended by the rules, I'd say they should be updated to state "you have to use the color math registers".

I have defined colour maths in the use part of the round:
Quote
Colour maths is the addition or subtraction of selected mainscreen layers with all of subscreen (or the fixed colour).

Sure, you might argue that it isn't part of the rules but I still wrote a definition in the round.

Originally posted by Von Fahrenheit
If you simulate color math CPU side but don't use the registers, does that count? The reason I'm asking about this is not arbitrary. Let's say, for example, that someone wanted to fade in a color filter rather than having it just pop up. Using the color math registers, this is impossible, as it will snap to from 100% to 50% opacity. What if someone wanted a color filter that does something other than the options allowed by the registers (add, sub, add/2, sub/2)? You would need to do stuff CPU side, and you'd probably want to turn off the regs due to interference...

The thing is: I never thought about filters but more in the direction of light and darkness and transparency. In fact, you're comparing apples with carrots: Just like how you can't replace complex filters with CG-RAM manipulation, you can't replace colour maths with CG-RAM modification except to affect all layers. They're two different things, really.

Originally posted by Von Fahrenheit
I take it that IF these are not allowed, then... well, I don't really know, I guess. Is it really about color math at that point? It seems to me like it will be about making a gimmick and using the color math regs at the same time, rather than actually doing something with color math because of how limited the options are. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it does make me wonder what the point of even requiring color math regs is.

The joke is that I look about CG-RAM in the same way as you see colour maths i.e. asking what the point of writing to CG-RAM even? The only idea I can think of is to use it with, guess what, colour maths (hooray!).

Originally posted by Von Fahrenheit
My point is that if we're allowed to do stuff CPU side we will have more avenues to explore creativity and make use of mathematical understanding of color. You simply don't get that when the PPU does everything for you.

Once again: Apples with carrots.

--------------------
Okay, my layout looks ugly.
Originally posted by MarioFanGamer
I have defined colour maths in the use part of the round


You have a point there. I completely forgot about that.

As for the poll, I'm not quite sure yet. I think I'll vote for sticking with the overall theme, since some people might have already started on their entries. I'm not sure if I'm voting to keep the ruleset or not, though. On one hand, making the ruleset about just color would be more in line with the rules of round 1 and would allow for more creative freedom, which (as people have pointed out there) is kind of the point. If you think about it, restricting people to use color maths is kinda equivalent to restricting them to, let's say, make something in patch form (which most people seemed to dislike when I proposed that in round 1).

On the other hand, I do have a personal interest in seeing what people might come up with being limited to using color maths. Also, in the sake of fairness, sticking with the intended ruleset might be the better option, since people might have already started working on something under those rules.

So not quite sure yet what to vote for. I'll think about it some more.

--------------------
Feel free to visit my website/blog - it's updated rarely, but it looks pretty cool!
I'm with RPG Hacker here. I don't really think it's very fair to change the rules mid-round, to be honest. Also, I think new and interesting things can be done with color math with some creativity; it's not true at all that the options are limited. I have already picked an idea and started with my submission, and if the round is now just about colors I might want to change it, or not participate altogether.

That said, having the color theme might make it easier for people that don't know/don't have time to learn about color math, and thus making people more eager to participate. The one option I think that would not make a lot of sense would be to change to an unrelated theme.
Although there's a lot of cool stuff you can do with colors straight up ignoring the register (I've got like 5 ideas), I was actually excited by restrictive nature of this round. Having it be so hard to come up with an idea means they're all going to be super unique. Possibly really cool. The rules were pretty explicit in my opinion.

(To be fair to Von, btw. You can do some crazy stuff CG-manip-only by structuring graphics in a specific way for example.)
Okay, it's been decided:

where blue is colour maths, green is a different theme and orange is colours in general and it's been decided: Round 2 will be about colours in general!

Round 2 - Darkness, Lightness and Colourness

Now we get to something more technical: Colour. There are a lot of ways to make a game colourful, from using HDMA to create colour gradients to colour maths for transparency, light and darkness.

Usage

Since it goes into technical area, not everyone knows how to work with colours. Manipulating the palette is easy and so is the fixed colour (just remember that you need three writes to COLDATA, one for red, green and blue with a specific bit set) but it's a different story for colour maths:
  • Colour maths is the addition or subtraction of selected mainscreen layers with all of subscreen (or the fixed colour).
  • CGADSUB ($2131, mirrored at $7E0040) allows you to specify whether colour maths is addition (transparency and light) or subtraction (darkness), halves the subscreen colours (think of Donut Ghost House) and each background layer, objects (sprites) and the backdrop (colour 0) on mainscreen are affected.
  • CGWSEL ($2130, mirrored at $7E0044) allows you to specify how colour maths should act with masking and allows you to specify whether the fixed colour or subscreen is added to mainscreen.
  • There are two backdrops, one for each screen: Colour 00 for mainscreen and fixed colour for subscreen.
  • Experiment with TM, TS, TMW and TSW ($212C-$212F) and see which results look interesting to you.
  • Sprite palettes 0-3/8-B aren't affected by colour maths. This is in many ways a disadvantage but in some cases also an advantage such as in a sprite-based HUD.
You can see more information about Color Math from Retro Game Mechanics Explained which also explains how the screen is rendered with windowing enabled.

The Rules

Make something cool with colours. This can be purely graphical to also gameplay related. You can create a dynamic colour filter to combine Colour Maths with windowing to create effects such as a light spot.

You're free to use $0703 Palette Uploader since it greatly helps

Much like before, the round is open for 10 days. Voting will be reduced to three days instead. The submission period ends at November 1st, 18:00 UTC.

--------------------
Okay, my layout looks ugly.
That's it for today! (Even if I came in three hours too late...) Voting will be open tomorrow.

--------------------
Okay, my layout looks ugly.

Round 2 - Voting

Alright, all the entries have been compiled into a single folder. This time, there are only four five entries but they still are creative IMO. Here are all the entires entries for round 2:
You can grab all the entries here.

To remind you on how to vote: You post the order of the entries where the highest ranked entry gets the most points. Don't focus on their names, presentations, audio but rather on the entries themselves i.e. how did they impress you, how interesting are the graphics, how fun are the entries to play if the entries are gameplay related and/or what are the entries' quality. Participants cannot vote.
You have around three days to submit a judgement. That means, you can submit your votes for round 2 up until November 5th, at 18:00 UTC!

Edit: Added videos.

EditĀ²: "Split" was supposed to be named "Time", added X-Ray.

--------------------
Okay, my layout looks ugly.
Hey is Split supposed to be named Time? I ask because that's the name of the Youtube Video

1. Beam
2. Dual
3. Elementary
4. Time

Ironically the same way you listed them lol.
Dual
At first, this entry felt a little underwhelming, but it just kept getting better and better, first with the big/small gimmick (which is quite creative), and then the moving transition line. Definitely a great combination of gimmick and a test level designed in a way that brings out the gimmick's fun.

Time
This is one of those entries where the principle is simple and subtle, but the execution is wonderful. The palettes are pretty and fit one another well, and the synchronization with the timer was cute!

X-Ray
This is a very wacky entry, and I like the inversion idea, especially with the blocks looking deceiving in the spotlight. Definitely has that silly ghost house shenanigan vibe to it, in an interesting way.

Elementary
I really love this entry, it's a very literal yet interesting interpretation of color math! The silliness and variety in the spotlights' movement patters was also endearing to me.

Beam
This entry honestly didn't have much to it, and the end result felt very difficult to play. While the colourful effects were really neat, actually using the platforms or physics alterations wasn't really practical: red and blue's effect on Mario is unpredictable, and white's platforms always disappear at the more unfortunate times (not to mention some platforms spawning away from the coin that indicates where they're centered). There's a good idea here, but I think it needs a lot more polish.
Elementary: a very cute idea with tons of potential.
Dual: wasn't too impressed until the moving inversion areas, which was super super cool. want a full level of this.
Split / Time(?): nice aesthetic idea and looks very solid.
Beam: technically impressive but isn't that playable.
X-Ray: another one of those things that looks cool, but interaction is rushed and the thing suffers overall from it.

--------------------
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 » Link
Forum Index - Sunken Ghost Ship - Old Contests & Events - Mad Scientist - ASM Contest [Final Results]

The purpose of this site is not to distribute copyrighted material, but to honor one of our favourite games.

Copyright © 2005 - 2020 - SMW Central
Legal Information - Privacy Policy - Link To Us


Menu

Follow Us On

  • YouTube
  • Twitch
  • Twitter

Affiliates

  • Super Mario Bros. X Community
  • ROMhacking.net
  • Mario Fan Games Galaxy