I'm not exactly sure how many it can handle. Space wise, it could do in the thousands. But as far as speed, I would imagine at 7 or 8 tiles of 4 polygons each you would notice slow downs. But I haven't tried it yet.

No lighting. I will now talk about another shortcut related to that. I store all the vertices in a table xyz. Then I have a table right after it which defines all the polygons. They each say what vertices they use, what color they are, and what side they are viewable from. So for instance:

tDarkQuad(dLeft, 0, 3, 7, 4)

I'm not even going to step through it. But what's important is that the shape is only drawn if the screen's x coordinate is left of vertex 0.

Spoiler For Spoiler:

I think we've gone so far past the whole "A graphing calculator is for math!" argument, we've left it lost forever. Like a mother-in-law you keep away. Far, far away. In a desert where the cacti may prey upon their tortured souls. And where you're in a nice, cool house someplace on the other side of the world. Yeah. That argument of a mother-in-law is so far out of sight, and out of mind, why are we even making references to it? Why can't it die in the desert like you wanted her? I mean, it's why you dumped it from the plane into the Sahara desert to begin with. I mean the sandy parts, so it'll live for a little bit. You want nothing to do with that abomination and you wish you had never heard of it to begin with. Graphing calculators, for math? What kind of rubbish have you never heard of?

Thanks for the info. Sorry if I offend you by what I am going to say next but couldn't you better use dithering instead of grayscale and let it take up the whole screen? Altough a clear side effect would be that you can't have custom sized sprites...(well you can but it's slightly slower I guess). Don't get me wrong. I like greyscale, I was just wondering if it would be practical/faster.