/vr/ - Retro Games

>>6679114
uncharted
>More erotic

>>3108356
And by god mods if you delete this thread you are soulless fucks.

>>2717152
>Without pixel-precision access rotation is gonna be a world of hurt, and an exercise in futility.

You just define a tile map that has a one-to-one correspondence to the character map and you can then emulate a bitmap by drawing to character memory. A gameboy is a turing complete machine, and Mode 7 is a computable function. It would be slow, yes, but doable. The only hardware limitation I can think of concern palettes, which unlike a true bitmap, an emulated one could have only 2^n number of colors, n depending on hardware and settings.

>I'm not talking about a circuit. I'm talking about a table of precomputed values in ROM/RAM, that's just read and used during hblank. Since the individual zoom factors are constant if you maintain the same elevation and viewing angle, it makes perfect sense to skip computation of these factors, and just dump them as a table of 200 or so factors on the rom, when producing the game.

Computing the values of the matrix on a perscan line basis isn't the computationally expensive part, which at worst running a handful of equations or a best table lookup. The hard part is applying matrix multiplication followed by vector addition on 256x240 individual pixels at 60Hz, which is why the hardware was revolutionary at the time.

>I don't get the point behind this, or what statement it is supposed to relate to.
The OPs original question:
"Are there any games that simulated Mode 7 on the other hardware than SNES?".
The answer is; old hardware no; new hardware it's possible.
Seems you forgot why you're in this thread.

>Which makes it rather dysfunctional in a polygonal context.
Dysfunctional or not, modern hardware can emulate Mode 7, and moreover do it millions of times a second. Just because the hardware is more capable doesn't change the fact that it can produce pixel perfect reproductions while still leveraging the mechanisms built into hardware (ie matrix multiplication).

>>2572340
>Wait, what kind of pants are we wearing, anyway?