/vr/ - Retro Games

>>9878230
also, honestly dread is quite a bit more impressive than doom in terms of tech.

It does most of the same tricks as doom, plus a lot of things doom doesn't do*, but it's running on far slower target hardware (7MHz 68000 vs ~40MHz 486s w/ cache, even if they were at the same clock speed, the 68000 would be at best 1/4 the overall performance).


* It uses BSPs like doom, but has a separate collision BSP, like quake, and a super fancy pvs algorithm, that takes advantage of the fact that it's not arbitrary 3D to do full occlusion sorting, so it's even more efficient than quake's.

It also has to work against the fact that the amiga is bitplane based, and does multi-pass planar to chunky conversion.
It has self-modifying code in the texture filling routine (which also abuses a 68k stack pointer alignment quirk) , as well as in the quad rasterization routines for the variable height renderer (of which there is one generated routine for each possible portal type)
Basically everything in the dread engine is optimized to demoscene level, it's nuts.

And some of the texture work looks damn good, especially considering the color restrictions (see pic)

I would love to see a snes fps with the same level of absurd optimization.