A summary of some problems I faced when tinkering with Quake to get it play nicely on an oscilloscope.
Exactly what it says on the tin. Quite amazing.
A summary of some problems I faced when tinkering with Quake to get it play nicely on an oscilloscope.
Exactly what it says on the tin. Quite amazing.
Don’t get me wrong; this is an amazing accomplishment. However, while watching the demo video, most of the time I had no idea what I was supposed to be seeing on the screen. It clearly needs a lot of work from your brain to interpret what is on the screen and connect it with your memories of how the level should look like.
And according to the author, this is as far as he could push it. Still, it would be awesome if others joined and managed to push the boundaries of the hardware even further (like in the 8-bit demoscene of yore). At last, measurement seminars could be fun. 
Savior,
Agree. It’s a neat idea, but the outcome isn’t very good. You can clearly see the oscilloscope wasting lines on unintentional “CAD-like” polygon artifacts that never appear in the final raster version. A (possibly) better aesthetic approach might have been to ignore the polygons structures all together and instead apply edge detection filters on the rasterized version. I think it would make it look more like what we see in the real game. This approach could work with arbitrary video.
You have a game designed for one type of technology, it is darn impressive that you can convert it to a very different display technology.
This looks better then it would if the made Quake for CGA
Vector draw games !
That’s one of the cooler wastes of time/exercises I’ve seen in a while.