The easiest to develop console

Heck, for PSP you can just code LUA scripts. You don't even need a real IDE or compiler.

 

That depends on what you are doing. LUA can do some things sure, but it's slower than real code and no doubt limited.

Lately I've been messing around with the SNES. Very cool to make it do what I want. Before I loved the NES but after awhile I got pretty annoyed by the way everything works on it. All kinds of things I wanted I realized were done a million times better on the SNES. So for now I love the SNES and maybe I'll be able to make something cool on it.

 

A major advantage of buying the DC's tech and make a portable out of it would be the tens (our hundreds) of AAA games that could be ported for it.

With the 20 best games of the DC for the portable's launch sales would skyrocket in no time.

 

I'll have to agree with the DC being quite easy to develop for. I've written a game for the Dreamcast, as well as a couple demos that were never finished. And this is with me using the PVR as a bastardized 2D accelerator. You can easily write stuff in C or C++ and KOS handles a ton of the low level stuff for you.

Although, the 360 with XNA is a nice development environment. Yeah, you are working in C#, and don't have any raw access to the hardware, but the idea is to create portable code for Windows and 360. I think anyway.

 

Ha-ha I was going to say Z80... Then again kids don't want to learn assembler these days... Shame really.

 

this.

though I prefer 68000 to Z80.

 

MIPS/ARM/PPC > 65XX > 68000 > IA32 > Z80 > DSP and MCU

 

I think to learn how to code the SNES audio chip is as satisfying as knowing how to code a gameboy if not more!

 

Audio "DSP" or processor? The SPC700 processor is a lot like a 6502, but even better, so that makes it a *whole* lot better than Z80

I actually think GB (including music) would be more satisfying to learn than just SPC + DSP since the DSP is sample based and boring even though it sounds great. SPC is also pretty limited in that it's only used in the SNES.

 

xna has to got to be the easiest beginner language because managed code. it's simple to read and all garbage collection is done automatically.

 

While that is a plus for C# (XNA is just another framework), a lot of beginners have trouble understanding the object oriented class structure at first. One of the universities here switched their introductory programming classes from C++ to Java (close enough) a couple of years ago and saw a dramatic increase in the number of early dropouts, as well as decreased enrollment for the subsequent semester. While I don't know if it has improved lately, the biggest complaint from the instructors was that students were not able to pick up on the OOP designs of the langauge quickly enough to be productive. With something like C or C++, they could learn very basic structured programming constructs and build from there.

 

dreamcast is the easiest one, at least to me.
Then the xbox maybe using the official XDK.

 

I started with a 8080 in assembly on a machine called a CompuColor. From there I programmed everything from the 6502, z80, x86, different 68K chips, SH1/SH2, MIPS, vector processors, to the PPC. I'm actually programming the 6809 now, doing a game for an old home arcade machine that has been getting some press lately.

I found 6502 very simple to pick up and become an expert in a short amount of time. This was not my experience on the x86 processors when you needed to support all the different flavors. When I started 68K stuff on the Amiga and then SEGA Genesis, I couldn't believe what it was like to have tons of registers to work with.

Going back to an 8-bit processor like the 6809 has been interesting. Sort of like a puzzle you need to solve.

--Selgus

 

I'm quite fond of the Z80 and Gameboy myself. Even though assembly is arguably harder, it always striked me as a nice easy to use chip. Though I grew up a C64 kid, I've barely touched the 6502.

Anyways, the point of me bringing this up is I wanted to point out the Toshiba TLCS900H [link], the chip in the Neo Geo Pocket consoles. I like to think of it as a Z80 on crack.

"A" gets a pairing register "W" (like how B and C become BC). Each register pairing is actually a 32bit register (XWA, XBC, XDE, XHL). There's 4 banks of registers, plus an extra three bonus registers IX, IY, and IZ (also 32bit with an X prefix). You can read about (for fun) at the link above. The PDF document "1. Outline to 4. Addressing Modes".

Anyways, as a fellow Z80 dork, I found it interesting.

 

Just as I found the 6809 to be a "better" 6502... additional registers, combine accums to make a 16-bit register, stack can be located anywhere, paging register for implied hi-byte address, etc.

The hard part has been trying to break my more recent habits from coding on Sony PS2 VUs and MIPS/PPC RISC processors. :icon_bigg

--Selgus

 

My comparisons (both long and boring)

Z80 is a cool processor. The Master System was a breeze compared with the NES. If you mean the GB/GBC then it is NOT a Z80, it's an 8080 with the BIT commands from Z80 added (oh, and LD A,(HLI) & LD (HLI),A ).

If your coding in assembler, then most of the 8/16 bit machines were good. Easier to list the bad ones.

In the newer consoles, I have to say, the Dreamcast really was well engineered. It's video-chip was very clever and Sonys claim that the PS2 was much more powerful was plainly a lie.

By manufacturers I would say Sega>Sony=Microsoft>Nintendo

Nintendo machines 'have character' by which I mean there is always some odd things about them. Remember the color-attributes on the NES, the 128-line count limit on the SNES, the tiny texture cache on the N64 (plus no true sound chip & the 18-bit Z-buffer), the odd video-compression of the Gamecube? Also, lets not forget the gameboy (odd sprite priority) and the Virtualboy; remember that? Really odd RISC processor with a really odd playfield effect. I had a devkit but you went blind just trying to test your code. Best use was to test for epilepsy...

Microsoft overburden you by placing so much system between coder and machine and overcomplicate things soooo often.
PS1 was great, PS2 had all those different areas of RAM you had to keep copying around. PS3 has that cell-processor that Sony claim amazing speeds for, but isn't so friendly to code. Never done PSX, but bet it's got some oddness...

Sega. The Master System was about as simple & problem free as possible (just those wait-states when copying to VRAM in screen-time (I used them to X-flip sprites). Megadrive was super easy. Even the mapping of the RAM was clever. You could reserve one address-register and point 32K into it and then... all RAM accesses could use short-word addressing. 32X was 2 SH2s, both of which had a proper cache so they didn't clash too much. MegaCD... errr.... I try to forget that traversty, their worst move EVER. Dreamcast - wonderful. The SH4 is a dream to code in C or ASM.

Let us not forget the PC engine. It used a 6502 derived processor. Video was accessed using 3 special instructions. The sound-chip was cool and the whole machine just looked great. Oh, and the number and size of sprites was amazing.

Basically, Sega has the best track record for technical robustness but the least success of all of them.

Sean ;-)

 

Ha, but you missed out the Saturn, which negates all the good they did until then :lol:

Either Yaroze on the PS1 or XBOX360 XNA. If you want easy then assembly is not your friend. Pick something that will let you code in C or C++. Of course, C# is easier still, but limited in the long run. The XBox is perhaps a good one if you can buy the dev kit.

 

Dunno, with the Saturn there were many attempts at getting the most off the hardware, while in the SCD developers would port a Genesis game, add CD sound and FMVs, which IMO was a big middle finger at SEGA's system architecture.

 

Well you had no choice with the Saturn. The MCD was an add-on so that's why it received poor support. Most developers didn't push the Saturn.

 

Is ironic actually, becos there was more hype around the SCD at launch that with the Saturn, which was released at a time were consumers were still wary about SEGA due to the recent fiasco with the 32X.