When people talk about the lack of a DOOM being the doom Commodore home computers, they aren’t talking about the C64, which was deep into obsolescence when demon-slaying suddenly became the minimal requirement for all computing devices. That didn’t stop [Kamil Wolnikowski] and [Piotr Kózka] from hacking together Grey a ray-cast first-person shooter for the Commodore 64.
Grey bares more than a passing resemblance to id-software’s most-ported project. It apparently runs at 16 frames per second on a vanilla C64 — no super CPU required. The secret to the speedy game play is the engine’s clever use of the system’s color mapping functionality: updating color maps is faster than redrawing the screen. Yeah, that makes for rather “blockier” graphics than DOOM, but this is running on a Commodore 64, not a 386 with 4 MB of RAM. Allowances must be made. Come to think of it, we don’t recall DOOM running this smooth on the minimum required hardware — check out the demo video below and let us know what you think.
The four-level demo currently available is about 175 kB, which certainly seems within the realms of possibility for disk games using the trusty 1541. Of course nowadays we do have easier ways to get games onto our vintage computers.
If you’re thinking about Commodore’s other home computer, it did eventually get a DOOM-clone.
Thanks to [Stephen Walters] for the tip.
“Commodore’s Most Popular Computer Gets DOOM-style Shooter”
That is a clickbait title – leave enough information missing to make people click the link to see “what on earth are they talking about?”.
I’m curious what you think is missing. We didn’t explicitly name the C-64, true, but it’s pretty common knowledge how popular it was in these circles. Likewise, the game DOOM is, uh, not exactly unknown.
If there’s information missing it’s because of the assumption that target audience will fill in the blanks, and not a deliberate attempt at click-baiting.
“Most popular” – that begs the question, what was Commodore’s most popular computer? It plays on the assumption that you know it was the C64 and since it isn’t named outright, you start to doubt yourself. Was there another computer?
Fair enough.
Basically, instead of saying the obvious, you substitute it with something that causes the reader to do a double take.
Example, “There’s one ingredient in candies that makes people fat.”
Article: “It’s sugar”.
The answer is obvious, but omitting a direct reference makes you doubt you already know it. You might reveal the information in the abstract/lead-in but that doesn’t make the title any less click-baity.
Seems like an entirely reasonable headline to me… what would you have them write? The entire article in the headline???!
Commodore 64 gets doom style shooter.
Advertising completely flat grid environments as “just like DOOM” has always been a pet-peeve of mine
I believe Doom was a “2.5D” game where the map was essentially flat, but you could define the height of the floor and the ceiling to create the illusion of a 3D space.