this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2024
922 points (98.9% liked)

RetroGaming

19338 readers
1302 users here now

Vintage gaming community.

Rules:

  1. Be kind.
  2. No spam or soliciting for money.
  3. No racism or other bigotry allowed.
  4. Obviously nothing illegal.

If you see these please report them.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Lemjukes@lemm.ee 53 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

It also makes it really portable which is a big part of why all the ports to modern systems are so close to the original. Obligatory OpenRCT2 shoutout.

[–] visor841@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

OpenRCT2 ditched assembly tho. They wrote it entirely in C++.

[–] Faresh@lemmy.ml 29 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

Writing it in assembly would make it pretty much the opposite of portable (not accounting for emulation), since you are directly giving instructions to a specific hardware and OS.

[–] Lemjukes@lemm.ee -2 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Not necessarily, unless you’re working on something like an OS you’re not usually directly accessing/working on the hardware. As long as you can connect the asm up to your os/driver abstraction layer and the os to hardware apis work the game should be functional. Not to mention RCT targets the x86 assembler architecture which was one of the most popular at the time

[–] Faresh@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

you’re not usually directly accessing/working on the hardware

I mean, you are. Sure, there's a layer of abstraction when doing tasks that require the intervention of the kernel, but you are still dealing with cpu registers and stuff like that. Merely by writing in assembly you are making your software less portable because you are writing for a specific ISA that only a certain family of processors can read, and talking with the kernel through an API or ABI that is specific to the kernel (standards like Posix mitigate the latter part somewhat, but some systems (windows) aren't Posix compilant).

[–] __dev@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago

That's no less true than games written in C, or otherwise with few dependencies. Doom is way more portable than RCT precisely because it's written in C instead of assembly.

[–] fubbernuckin@lemmy.world 19 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Started playing openrct2 multiplayer with a friend yesterday. Some of the best fun I've had.

[–] DogWater@lemmy.world 6 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

My friend and I created MONORAIL LAND

[–] fubbernuckin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

We created the world of monorail 1. Everything exists to bring more people to monorail 1. What is monorail 1? It is a 4 car monorail that takes the shortest possible path back to the start of the station. We have several other attractions at the park such as: The Pit; Memento Mori; Install CSS, but none of them are the main attraction.

[–] IlIllIIIllIlIlIIlI@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Does it have a scientist Batman?

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 13 points 13 hours ago

Damn this post. This is really going to f up my weekend plans.