Any games utilising fast emulation?

[SteveSmith]

It just occurred to me that it would be interesting if there were any Speccy games that utilised fast emulation in order to create something really visually impressive, like a full-screen 3D game running at 60 fps. I assume someone must have done this, but a quick bit of googling didn't turn anything up. Has something like this been tried?

[Lee Bee]

Good question. I've been working on a series of videos (coming soon) showing the kind of impressive graphics the Speccy could achieve if it had more CPU (at 60fps). It's not actually running on a Spectrum though, it's only a visualiser

[Alone Coder]

Wolfenstein 2004, Pang 16C, Ball Quest, Супер Марио, ZX Battle City, Delta's Shadow make use of turbo mode (it's very popular in Russia).

[Ralf]

You can always run stuff like Driller (and other full 3D Spectrum games) with emulator speeded up to 800% or so.
Or any chess program at higher level
It will be a much better experience.

[FFoulkes]

if there were any Speccy games that utilised fast emulation in order to create something really visually impressive, like a full-screen 3D game running at 60 fps.

I still don't get, why people mess with 48K or 128K limit, graphics limitations and difficult Z80 assembler programming, when they can just create 2D games on a PC in Python/Pygame (OpenSource, no costs for development software, not much more difficult than Spectrum BASIC, maybe even easier). Games, that can look pixel-exact like Spectrum games and run faster than ordinary Spectrum assembler.
Seems, the community hates this approach. "But it's not a real Spectrum!", they say - well, an emulated Spectrum on a PC running at 800% speed isn't that real either, is it?
So I'm probably nearly the only one who uploaded a few examples, what can be done in this regard (that is 80's style games in Python): These and this (3D ray-caster).
I wish, more people were joining me on this route.

[Lethargeek]

You can always run stuff like Driller (and other full 3D Spectrum games) with emulator speeded up to 800% or so.
Or any chess program at higher level
It will be a much better experience.

and even better experience if this emulator leaves beeper sound at normal speed

[Einar Saukas]

I still don't get, why people mess with 48K or 128K limit, graphics limitations and difficult Z80 assembler programming, when they can just create 2D games on a PC in Python/Pygame

I still don't get why people mess with 2D games in Python/Pygame when they can just use a game creator like GameMaker.

However I still don't get why people mess with game creation at all when they can just play games created by others.

[SteveSmith]

I still don't get, why people mess with 48K or 128K limit, graphics limitations and difficult Z80 assembler programming, when they can just create 2D games on a PC in Python/Pygame (OpenSource, no costs for development software, not much more difficult than Spectrum BASIC, maybe even easier). Games, that can look pixel-exact like Spectrum games and run faster than ordinary Spectrum assembler.
Seems, the community hates this approach. "But it's not a real Spectrum!", they say - well, an emulated Spectrum on a PC running at 800% speed isn't that real either, is it?
I wish, more people were joining me on this route.

I suppose it begs the question, when does it stop being a Spectrum game? I created Super Spectrum World a few years ago, which is almost as you describe, i.e. A PC game that looks exactly like a Spectrum game (as it uses ripped Spectrum gfx, but no colour clash (I'll leave others to decide if that's a good thing)). No-one was impressed.

[+3code]

I created Super Spectrum World a few years ago, which is almost as you describe, i.e. A PC game that looks exactly like a Spectrum game (as it uses ripped Spectrum gfx, but no colour clash (I'll leave others to decide if that's a good thing)). No-one was impressed.

Well, it is more impressive if a Spectrum game looks like a PC game than the opposite

[rastersoft]

I still don't get, why people mess with 48K or 128K limit, graphics limitations and difficult Z80 assembler programming

I don't know others, but in my case... because I can

[Ralf]

I still don't get, why people mess with 48K or 128K limit, graphics limitations and difficult Z80 assembler programming, when they can just create 2D games on a PC in Python/Pygame

[p13z]

I still don't get, why people mess with 48K or 128K limit, graphics limitations and difficult Z80 assembler programming, when they can just create 2D games on a PC in Python/Pygame (OpenSource, no costs for development software, not much more difficult than Spectrum BASIC, maybe even easier). Games, that can look pixel-exact like Spectrum games and run faster than ordinary Spectrum assembler.

Creativity is often more enjoyable, inspired and actually creative - with limitations in place.
Why write rock songs using guitars and drums - when you could whap it all together with samples, synths and protools?
Why write and perform music with an orchestra, when you could hook a good synth up to a midi sequencer?
Why paint a picture, when you can just aim your Iphone, and fiddle around with artistic filters?

All personal choice -
The latter options are generally easier, but soul-less, less impressive and way less satisfying (IMO).

[Swainy]

Narc runs really nice running at 7MHz on the Next.

https://instagram.com/p/B9wkN6sHtKm/

[Luzie]

As written here: viewtopic.php?p=75232#p75232 and here: viewtopic.php?p=75301#p75301

"Arkanoid Back to Basic" plays well with 7MHz on Next or Uno.

[Lee Bee]

I still don't get, why people mess with 48K or 128K limit, graphics limitations and difficult Z80 assembler programming, when they can just create 2D games on a PC[…]

That's like asking "Why spend hours painting a landscape when you can just take a photo?" You miss out on the joy of working within the confines of a particular medium.

But let me give three specific answers:

Limitations are good
I'd say the whole reason people still love the Speccy (and retro machines) is because of the inherent limitations, and the challenge of working within them. People like simplicity, and the limited scope of the Spectrum is comfortable to work with. Remove those limitations and the work becomes too open-ended, even stressful.

Fixed style
The Speccy's limitations ensure all its games have a particular graphical style and audio quality, which happens to be very beautiful. Removing these restrictions allows that style to become eroded. If you can "improve" the graphics and sound - where do you stop? The medium quickly loses its identity (*cough* Next *cough*). Alternatively, if you try to conform a PC game to the style of a Spectrum, there's something artificial, even dishonest, about it. (Kind of like "mutton dressed as lamb"!)

Standard platform
Plus, using a PC opens up issues of compatibility, different specs, installing Python, etc. You're moving toward complexity. In a sense, there is no such thing as a 'standard PC platform' and that's one of the reasons I have never touched PC games - I hate the inconsistency, the uncertainty of not knowing if things will work, and the complexity of setting them up. On the other hand, the joy of the Spectrum is its simplicity. It's one, basic, elegant, universal platform. A standardised piece of hardware which, theoretically, should always run all games the same. (On the basis that 128k capabilities are generally accepted as standard now.)

[Alone Coder]

Seems, the community hates this approach. "But it's not a real Spectrum!", they say - well, an emulated Spectrum on a PC running at 800% speed isn't that real either, is it?

That's not the case. Turbo mode is real and used in many clones since PLM/Avtomatika (1987) and Tim-S (1988). Profi had up to 12 MHz CPU even in 1995 (see ZX-Ревю 6'95). Sprinter had 21 MHz in ZX Spectrum mode already in 1997.

[Alone Coder]

The Speccy's limitations ensure all its games have a particular graphical style and audio quality, which happens to be very beautiful. Removing these restrictions allows that style to become eroded. If you can "improve" the graphics and sound - where do you stop?

Where PC stopped?
The real limitation is making the add-ons on the base of existing hardware (so, no in-FPGA "Spectrums" impossible to add in hardware), and these add-ons must not be computers by themselves, for which Spectrum is only a keyboard.
The point is keeping ZX Spectrum alive, not burying it in 1985.

[Alessandro]

That's like asking "Why spend hours painting a landscape when you can just take a photo?"

I've been taking photos of landscapes in places which in order to be reached from where I live in require taking two or three flights for a total of about 16 hours (excluding waiting times) and walking for hours amidst woods, swamps and snow (like this one). Why not just taking a picture of what I see from my window?