I think I've gained a reputation on this site for finishing some projects and giving up/canceling others.  With that said, I'm very hopefully going to Russia this year, but it will not take me away from Omnimaga. 

It does make me think seriously about the future of Elimination, considering that half the people want the graphics to be nicer-looking--I'm not sure about continuing a game that not many people want to play.  To fix everything would require me to study raycasting.

Until I know what to do, I've been working on a new puzzle game, much easier to program and quite fun to work with.  (It's totally unoptimized and yet runs wonderfully)  But even though my life is my life, I'm worried about disappointing people if they see the game and in the future find out it's "yet another project that gets canceled."

Here's one screenshot.  Should I keep the rest of the project secret so that you aren't disappointed, or are you eager to see more of the game as I progress?

The next one is

SCF

Normally, this is used for math (do share )

Sometimes I find the need to use the carry flag for conditions beyond what it is normally used for (detecting overflows or underflows).  For example, I could theoratically use C or NC to see if an object is collidable or not.  Whatever the situation, I would use SCF to set the carry flag if a condition is true. 

It was the grayscale that slowed it down.  B&W for Gemini requires the screen to be copied only once per loop, grayscale requires about 3.5-4 times per loop.

People complaining about the small viewport in Gemini (which they rightfully did) isn't really reason enough to double pixels. Again, on a 96x64 screen, the spatial extent of every pixel counts so treat every pixel with love and cut the fancy additions and do 96 proper casts.

I know that now.  I have relatively little knowledge on raycasting, so I was hoping that making the screen bigger would be enjoyable enough for everyone, not just 50% of the people.  Whatever the case, you're talking to someone who's done very little research on raycasting

DJ, thank you so much for bumping this, and I'm sorry that I didn't explain about the file being in three parts.  I thought that when people saw ".part1", ".part2" and ".part3" they would know.  I goofed

Instead of stretching the screen, why don't you just use only a part of the screen? Sure you'll have a lot of blank area, but I'll look so much better.

Because so many people complained about lack of fullscreen in Gemini.  Assuming that new fidelity will solve the blocky walls, there will be no need to stretch the screen or use only part of the screen.

EDIT: Btw, to answer your question coelurus, the Ti-83+ SE and Ti-84+ calculators have extra RAM, so I was able to create two textures for each wall, thus allowing 3-way grayscale

Is there a tilemap routine, smooth-scrolling, that works for 16x16 tiles and that avoids simply applying a 16x16 sprite routine?  I normally used JimE's fast tilemapper, but it requires a lot of RAM

I think that what needs to be done is instead of scaling up the original 64x48 display, you should recalculate in a way that it takes advantage of the full screen. However, I'M unsure if that would reduce framerate a lot (I assume not that much considering displaying the game full screen in the first place didn't)
 

Framerate would actually be slowed down a lot.  Stretching the screen requires little computational power compared to calculating 48 additional rays and plotting 16 additional rows.  I think the grayscale would have to go.  However, if people would enjoy the game that way, (better looking walls and enemies rather than grayscale walls) it's something I could arrange