Intellivision Amico - Tommy Tallarico introduction + Q&A

1 hour ago, Nolagamer said:

Will pool be a stand alone game or will it be a multi game  like with another basic yet full game or 2?  Or ate you undecided yet still. 

Pool is standalone.  Going to probably have a few different ways to play and some arcade type stuff as well.

1 minute ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

Pool is standalone.  Going to probably have a few different ways to play and some arcade type stuff as well.

 

Tommy,

I already know the answer ("no"), but I thought I'd ask it anyway... don't you ever sleep?

42 minutes ago, jaybird3rd said:

There's definitely something special about "Shark! Shark!".  A quick story: at my university, I decided to kick off this semester with a retro gaming party, hosted through our Computer Science Club.  One of the systems in the exhibit (all from my own collection) was an Intellivision, complete with a full ECS setup.  The Music Synthesizer keyboard and Melody Blaster definitely got the most attention, since the students had never seen anything like them, but I also wanted to find something less intimidating that non-gamers could enjoy.  There was one Chinese student in particular who had never played anything other than Pokémon, so I showed her "Shark! Shark!" and explained the rules in the form of the proverb that the game was based on: "big fish eat little fish."  She got the idea right away and was excited to try it, and a short explanation of the controls (less than a minute) was all that she needed; we took turns playing it for the next twenty minutes and she got a really good score!  If that experience is any indication, I'm sure that a new version on the Amico would do very well.

Awesome story!  And I TOTALLY want to come to one of your Computer Science Club get togethers someday if you've been busting out the ECS & Synth!  Time to jam my brotha!   Hahahha!

We see the same exact thing with our focus testing as well.  In regards to "arcade" style action games... Shark! Shark! is the one game that lots of moms and daughters are immediately drawn to for playing together.  Really fun to watch them interact.  And the great thing about the way I designed the new one is that you can play co-op or versus.  

5 minutes ago, RxScram said:

Tommy,

I already know the answer ("no"), but I thought I'd ask it anyway... don't you ever sleep?

Answer (for the official record):  No.

I'm one of the lucky 1% - 2% of the worlds population that has this: 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/sleep-newzzz/201104/could-you-be-super-sleeper

I can only sleep around 4 hours a night.  I go immediately into deep sleep within minutes.

So I'm always up and working after the wife goes to sleep. 

I feel like there's some confusion with what 3D actually is...

Except for a few games like Emoji Charades, every game I saw in the latest trailer was clearly rendered in 3D graphics (with polygons) even when the gameplay was 2D. That being said, even 2D games are actually rendered in 3D these days. I think the GBA was the last tile-based game system (not counting Chinese Famicom clones of course); the Dreamcast already displayed 2D sprites on polygons. And I would be very surprised if Amico was not using modern engines like Unity that also use polygons to display 2D...

Anyway, I don't understand how people can think Amico "can't do 3D" with games like Skiing, Cornhole, Moon Patrol, and Auto Racing especially, where the camera is sometimes from a angled perspective in the trailer. Safecracker is also clearly 3D when seen in motion; by the way it looks a lot better that way than in screenshots (which look completely 'flat', but it's the purpose of this art style).

1 hour ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

Answer (for the official record):  No.

 

I'm one of the lucky 1% - 2% of the worlds population that has this: 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/sleep-newzzz/201104/could-you-be-super-sleeper

 

I can only sleep around 4 hours a night.  I go immediately into deep sleep within minutes.

 

So I'm always up and working after the wife goes to sleep. 

 

 

I'm in this same club  I'm actually about to go to bed it's about 4am gotta get up for 8 8:30 . 

2 hours ago, roots.genoa said:

I feel like there's some confusion with what 3D actually is...

 

Except for a few games like Emoji Charades, every game I saw in the latest trailer was clearly rendered in 3D graphics (with polygons) even when the gameplay was 2D. That being said, even 2D games are actually rendered in 3D these days. I think the GBA was the last tile-based game system (not counting Chinese Famicom clones of course); the Dreamcast already displayed 2D sprites on polygons. And I would be very surprised if Amico was not using modern engines like Unity that also use polygons to display 2D...

 

Anyway, I don't understand how people can think Amico "can't do 3D" with games like Skiing, Cornhole, Moon Patrol, and Auto Racing especially, where the camera is sometimes from a angled perspective in the trailer. Safecracker is also clearly 3D when seen in motion; by the way it looks a lot better that way than in screenshots (which look completely 'flat', but it's the purpose of this art style).

 

By some definitions, a 3D game where the player movement is restricted to a flat plane, (e.g. no hills to climb, no aiming weapons to the sky) would be called 2.5D.   You could have a 3D open world game but if it had these restrictions it would be called 2.5D.  Amico Moon Patrol, with all the action in the x-z plane could, by this definition, be called 2.5D even though it's a 3D game.

If you take snapshots of 3D rendered computer models or prerecord 3D animations and put them in a 2D game it's still a 2D game.  They use to do this in the old days when computers weren't fsst enough to render high quality in realtime.  For example you could model a scene in 3D to calculate shadows but then take a snap shot for the background in a 2D game.  Snes Donkey kong country is an example where they 3D modeled/rendered donkey kong but used snap shots for 2D sprite animation in the game.  In the amico trailer, Shark Shark shows 3D background panning but the game itself only has static backgrounds.  The fish could be 2D sprite animation or the game could be completely 3D.  Ecco shows a panning but otherwise static background image.  The safecracker driving scene, as previously pointed out is not static 3D or prerecorded, it looks to be 3D.

We know, through a developer interview, that Amico Night Stalker is a 2D game with tricks to make it look 3D.  It's not unlike the old isometric games like Zaxxon and Marble Madness.  They call this 2.5D but it's completely 2D in the computer.  I'm really surprised Amico Night Stalker was done this way.  Again, with today's tools, wouldn't it be easier to do in 3D.

1 hour ago, mr_me said:

I'm really surprised Amico Night Stalker was done this way.  Again, with today's tools, wouldn't it be easier to do in 3D.

I 100% agree, I would really like more details about that from the developers...

3 hours ago, roots.genoa said:

I feel like there's some confusion with what 3D actually is...

 

Except for a few games like Emoji Charades, every game I saw in the latest trailer was clearly rendered in 3D graphics (with polygons) even when the gameplay was 2D. That being said, even 2D games are actually rendered in 3D these days. I think the GBA was the last tile-based game system (not counting Chinese Famicom clones of course); the Dreamcast already displayed 2D sprites on polygons. And I would be very surprised if Amico was not using modern engines like Unity that also use polygons to display 2D...

 

Anyway, I don't understand how people can think Amico "can't do 3D" with games like Skiing, Cornhole, Moon Patrol, and Auto Racing especially, where the camera is sometimes from a angled perspective in the trailer. Safecracker is also clearly 3D when seen in motion; by the way it looks a lot better that way than in screenshots (which look completely 'flat', but it's the purpose of this art style).

 

1 hour ago, mr_me said:

By some definitions, a 3D game where the player movement is restricted to a flat plane, (e.g. no hills to climb, no aiming weapons to the sky) would be called 2.5D.   You could have a 3D open world game but if it had these restrictions it would be called 2.5D.  Amico Moon Patrol, with all the action in the x-z plane could, by this definition, be called 2.5D even though it's a 3D game.

 

If you take snapshots of 3D rendered computer models or prerecord 3D animations and put them in a 2D game it's still a 2D game.  They use to do this in the old days when computers weren't fsst enough to render high quality in realtime.  For example you could model a scene in 3D to calculate shadows but then take a snap shot for the background in a 2D game.  Snes Donkey kong country is an example where they 3D modeled/rendered donkey kong but used snap shots for 2D sprite animation in the game.  In the amico trailer, Shark Shark shows 3D background panning but the game itself only has static backgrounds.  The fish could be 2D sprite animation or the game could be completely 3D.  Ecco shows a panning but otherwise static background image.  The safecracker driving scene, as previously pointed out is not static 3D or prerecorded, it looks to be 3D.

 

We know, through a developer interview, that Amico Night Stalker is a 2D game with tricks to make it look 3D.  It's not unlike the old isometric games like Zaxxon and Marble Madness.  They call this 2.5D but it's completely 2D in the computer.  I'm really surprised Amico Night Stalker was done this way.  Again, with today's tools, wouldn't it be easier to do in 3D.

Many months ago, Tommy was saying the chip they are using is capable of 2D and 2.5D, but not 3D, so, that is where I got the idea. Basically, the explanation was that 2.5D is 2D tricked out to look 3D. This discussion of it being called 2.5D even though it's 3D is a little perplexing. AFAIK, old school sprites are 2D or 2.5D and polygons are 3D.

Ridge Racer is supposed to be one of the earliest 3D on a console, from 1993:

also, G.I. Joe for arcade, 1992:

I *think* Aliens arcade was 2.5D, 1990.

Hey Swami, those games are really cool but I think...

- 3D games on consoles started much earlier than Ridge Racer: Hard Drivin' was released in 1990. If we count computers, 3D games are there since the 70s, but they started to become popular with the Freescape engine in 1987. Perhaps you mean "3D games with textures"?

- Sprite scaling is not 3D

- The Aliens game doesn't have any 3D or 2.5D elements

There are too many definitions of 2.5D, so I wouldn't bother. I've seen this term applied to the weird and original Duke Nukem 3D/Blood engine, I've also seen it applied to platform games with 2D controls and 3D graphics... This is why I prefer to use this later definition for games on the Amico.

Offtopic: Since many video game experts are watching this topic, can anyone recommend good graphic adventures for Android?

If possible: not violent, free to download, not too difficult, 1st person. It's for a family member. I tried asking on the Modern Gaming subforum but nobody answers.

Something like Myst, but a bit easier.

31 minutes ago, IntelliMission said:

Hey Swami, those games are really cool but I think...

 

- 3D games on consoles started much earlier than Ridge Racer: Hard Drivin' was released in 1990. If we count computers, 3D games are there since the 70s, but they started to become popular with the Freescape engine in 1987. Perhaps you mean "3D games with textures"?

 

- Sprite scaling is not 3D

 

- The Aliens game doesn't have any 3D or 2.5D elements

 

There are too many definitions of 2.5D, so I wouldn't bother. I've seen this term applied to the weird and original Duke Nukem 3D/Blood engine, I've also seen it applied to platform games with 2D controls and 3D graphics... This is why I prefer to use this later definition for games on the Amico.

The point was simple 3D that wasn’t too “geometric” (which would be 3D with textures) vs fancy 2D, but better examples are welcome. The information is still that Tommy said the Amico chip could do 2D and 2.5D but not 3D and 2.5D tends to get called 3D or 2D, depending, because almost no one really knows what 2.5D means. 

1 hour ago, Swami said:

 

Many months ago, Tommy was saying the chip they are using is capable of 2D and 2.5D, but not 3D, so, that is where I got the idea. Basically, the explanation was that 2.5D is 2D tricked out to look 3D. This discussion of it being called 2.5D even though it's 3D is a little perplexing. AFAIK, old school sprites are 2D or 2.5D and polygons are 3D.

I agree, 3D polygon or even 3D wireframe graphics (eg. battlezone and stellar 7) makes them 3D games to me.  Others would call them 2.5D.  Red Baron which is the same technology as battlezone couldn't be called 2.5d.

36 minutes ago, IntelliMission said:

Hey Swami, those games are really cool but I think...

 

- 3D games on consoles started much earlier than Ridge Racer: Hard Drivin' was released in 1990. If we count computers, 3D games are there since the 70s, but they started to become popular with the Freescape engine in 1987. Perhaps you mean "3D games with textures"?

 

- Sprite scaling is not 3D

 

- The Aliens game doesn't have any 3D or 2,5D elements

 

There are too many definitions of 2.5D, so I wouldn't bother. I've seen this term applied to the weird and original Duke Nukem 3D/Blood engine, I've also seen it applied to platform games with 2D controls and 3D graphics... This is why I prefer to use this later definition for games on the Amico.

Intellivision World Series Baseball is 3D to the computer.  The ball is a pixel in 3d space but the player sprites are 2D with sprite scaling, backgrounds were static views.  Graphically, it's a 2D game.

To me 2.5d means fake 3d like the old isometric games.   But they're not 3d graphics.

-----------

In the Amico's case they just want to avoid the comparison to other 3d games on other systems so the 2.5d description suits them.

4 hours ago, roots.genoa said:

I feel like there's some confusion with what 3D actually is...

 

Except for a few games like Emoji Charades, every game I saw in the latest trailer was clearly rendered in 3D graphics (with polygons) even when the gameplay was 2D. That being said, even 2D games are actually rendered in 3D these days. I think the GBA was the last tile-based game system (not counting Chinese Famicom clones of course); the Dreamcast already displayed 2D sprites on polygons. And I would be very surprised if Amico was not using modern engines like Unity that also use polygons to display 2D...

 

Anyway, I don't understand how people can think Amico "can't do 3D" with games like Skiing, Cornhole, Moon Patrol, and Auto Racing especially, where the camera is sometimes from a angled perspective in the trailer. Safecracker is also clearly 3D when seen in motion; by the way it looks a lot better that way than in screenshots (which look completely 'flat', but it's the purpose of this art style).

 

I think it's probably almost impossible these days to actually define what is or isn't 3D because of all the tricks that can be used to make something "look" 3D.  Most of what we do is officially consider 2.5D.  We also "bake in" a lot of effects to make it look 3D when it really isn't.  Old school tricks like this are used to get the most out of the chip and framerate.  Which most old school programmers actually love doing.

4 hours ago, Nolagamer said:

I'm in this same club  I'm actually about to go to bed it's about 4am gotta get up for 8 8:30 . 

Nice! 

Went to bed at 2am... was up at 6am.  

2 hours ago, mr_me said:

By some definitions, a 3D game where the player movement is restricted to a flat plane, (e.g. no hills to climb, no aiming weapons to the sky) would be called 2.5D.   You could have a 3D open world game but if it had these restrictions it would be called 2.5D.  Amico Moon Patrol, with all the action in the x-z plane could, by this definition, be called 2.5D even though it's a 3D game.

 

If you take snapshots of 3D rendered computer models or prerecord 3D animations and put them in a 2D game it's still a 2D game.  They use to do this in the old days when computers weren't fsst enough to render high quality in realtime.  For example you could model a scene in 3D to calculate shadows but then take a snap shot for the background in a 2D game.  Snes Donkey kong country is an example where they 3D modeled/rendered donkey kong but used snap shots for 2D sprite animation in the game.  In the amico trailer, Shark Shark shows 3D background panning but the game itself only has static backgrounds.  The fish could be 2D sprite animation or the game could be completely 3D.  Ecco shows a panning but otherwise static background image.  The safecracker driving scene, as previously pointed out is not static 3D or prerecorded, it looks to be 3D.

 

We know, through a developer interview, that Amico Night Stalker is a 2D game with tricks to make it look 3D.  It's not unlike the old isometric games like Zaxxon and Marble Madness.  They call this 2.5D but it's completely 2D in the computer.  I'm really surprised Amico Night Stalker was done this way.  Again, with today's tools, wouldn't it be easier to do in 3D.

So hard to define these days.  A lot of the backgrounds are actually 2D "cards" set up to make it look 3D.  Old Genesis & SNES games did these kinds of "tricks" as well.  But weren't really considered 3D.

Mike Mika is able to get more out of the chip and levels by faking the 3D. He's an old school programmer and loves the art of programming... taking directly to the metal (as they say) excites a lot of these types of highly educated folks who find a ton of joy in their craft as opposed to just throwing scripts on top of each other in Unity (which is typical in a lot of the new generation of folks doing games in Unity).  Night Stalker isn't even done in Unity.  It's Mike's own personal engine.  He is a god.

I think the easiest way for people to understand is to say we don't really have any "open world" 3D.  That's how I try to define it as it's too difficult (and probably confusing for most) as to how each game is accomplished.  I would say about half of the examples you gave were correct...  so again... super difficult to define how we're pulling off certain things... and why.  I'm sure articles and interviews may be done in the future as to how certain things are done (and why).  It's all very interesting to the folks who are into it.

1 hour ago, roots.genoa said:

I 100% agree, I would really like more details about that from the developers...

For the style of game... his way was much better and more dynamic.

Basically... no one should ever doubt "The Mika!" 

🤩

All this "hot 2.5D" talk reminded me of a ps1 game called Klonoa. 

Tommy,

There were GBA versions of Klonoa which were solidly 2D and were very puzzle based.

Any chance of ringing up Namco and getting a Klonoa gba-like puzzle game for the Amico?

Maybe a year 3 thing?

1 hour ago, Swami said:

 

Many months ago, Tommy was saying the chip they are using is capable of 2D and 2.5D, but not 3D, so, that is where I got the idea. Basically, the explanation was that 2.5D is 2D tricked out to look 3D. This discussion of it being called 2.5D even though it's 3D is a little perplexing. AFAIK, old school sprites are 2D or 2.5D and polygons are 3D.

 

Ridge Racer is supposed to be one of the earliest 3D on a console, from 1993:

 

also, G.I. Joe for arcade, 1992:

 

I *think* Aliens arcade was 2.5D, 1990.

 

It's "capable" of 3D... and it's even "capable" of open world 3D... but not really something we're focused on or the chip is really built to handle. 

This is part of the reason this particular chip was chosen... because we were never interested in doing open world 3D (or traditional 3D) type of stuff.  This plays to our advantage for other things... mainly pricing and availability.

Sometimes it's just easier to say we aren't really interested in doing traditional 3D types of games.  Much easier than to try and go into what exactly is considered 3D and what isn't, etc.

I think when most people think of a 3D game these days they think of Call of Duty, Red Dead Redemption, etc.  True open world 3D.  Easy to get lost in the weeds with all of this and spark many debates.  So I keep it simple and say we focus on 2D and 2.5D. 

 

3 minutes ago, Michael Garvey said:

All this "hot 2.5D" talk reminded me of a ps1 game called Klonoa. 

 

Tommy,

 

There were GBA versions of Klonoa which were solidly 2D and were very puzzle based.

 

Any chance of ringing up Namco and getting a Klonoa gba-like puzzle game for the Amico?

 

Maybe a year 3 thing?

I remember reviewing that game on our TV show.  Had really colorful and fun graphics if I remember properly.

1 hour ago, IntelliMission said:

Offtopic: Since many video game experts are watching this topic, can anyone recommend good graphic adventures for Android?

 

If possible: not violent, free to download, not too difficult, 1st person. It's for a family member. I tried asking on the Modern Gaming subforum but nobody answers.

 

Something like Myst, but a bit easier.

Minecraft.

Slightly off topic. There was a H.E.R.O. inspired game discussed here about 2 weeks ago.  I tried looking up information but everything I found was about a year old.

Does anyone know the status of this game?

Bobby Bombastic 

6 hours ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

Answer (for the official record):  No.

 

I'm one of the lucky 1% - 2% of the worlds population that has this: 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/sleep-newzzz/201104/could-you-be-super-sleeper

 

I can only sleep around 4 hours a night.  I go immediately into deep sleep within minutes.

 

So I'm always up and working after the wife goes to sleep. 

 

 

That was an interesting article Tommy.  Thanks for sharing.  I never heard of a super sleeper or a short sleeper.

Another thought.

How about a ninja game where you are a kid and you have to sneak around the house.

2D action of course.

The parent would always be somewhere in the background kind of pretending not to see you but if you blatantly got in front of them they'd catch you.

It could work on two levels: kids thinking they are being sneaky and adults pretending they cant see the obvious.

Two or three player could have some play the parents but they couldnt "catch" the kid ninja unless they were directly in there zone.

Could have puzzled and platforming. 

Just a thought. 

40 minutes ago, Tommy Tallarico said:

It's "capable" of 3D... and it's even "capable" of open world 3D... but not really something we're focused on or the chip is really built to handle. 

This is part of the reason this particular chip was chosen... because we were never interested in doing open world 3D (or traditional 3D) type of stuff.  This plays to our advantage for other things... mainly pricing and availability.

 

Sometimes it's just easier to say we aren't really interested in doing traditional 3D types of games.  Much easier than to try and go into what exactly is considered 3D and what isn't, etc.

 

I think when most people think of a 3D game these days they think of Call of Duty, Red Dead Redemption, etc.  True open world 3D.  Easy to get lost in the weeds with all of this and spark many debates.  So I keep it simple and say we focus on 2D and 2.5D. 

 

 

This is beyond me as well, but the discussion got a bit divergent. I had just brought up 3D since I suspected Lord Rayken’s acquaintances picked Horizon Chaser, a very basic but very 3D game, to fixate on something you hadn’t made a priority (so, possibly couldn’t replicate).  It just again seems like reaching for something to gripe about. But, that was a few days ago now. 🙂