Ward Shrake

Pretty cool stuff, guys! Good work -- (as always) -- Mister Adam!

I immediately thought of what you had said, above, when (at random) I unexpectedly ran into this quote on someone's Facebook page: "The legendary cellist Pablo Casals was asked why he continued to practice at age 90. 'Because I think I'm making progress,' he replied." (I just liked the quote. Figured I'd post it here, just for kicks.)

Adam said: > Finally, there is an interview with Ward Shrake, > who created multicarts for several systems, > including one for the Bally Arcade/Astrocade. I just listened to that interview, tonight -- and I gotta say that, in terms of listening to myself talk: over time I'd forgotten much of what Adam had asked me, and what my answers had been, so it was kinda weird listening to that interview. It feels different -- (at least in terms of perceived speed of listening to someone and then replying; when hearing it, long after it was recorded) -- than it felt when it was just me sitting there and B.S.'ing with my good friend. As for how "I" sounded, or think I sounded ... I guess if a person is gonna sound like a dork, maybe sounding like a dork on coffee makes it better!?! Apologies to the hardcore Astrocade types, that so little of what I said was on-topic for that system! (Sounded more like a VIC-20 interview, almost!?) As for how the interview sounded, and "flowed": I thought Chris did quite a good job on editing what he had. Kudos to him for that! Thanks, man! Anyway ... ignoring how weird it feels to be listening to myself, and focusing on the other parts of the three podcasts (counting episode zero) ... yeah, it was informative. Adam's highlights from the various newsletters, for instance, gave me a much better grasp of how various users once must have felt, with all of the delays and set-backs and what not. The huge wait times between promised dates of delivery and the actual deliveries, must have really been an upsetting thing! I'm finally able to see more of the motivation for things like the efforts users put forth, to support their little community. At the same time, it was good to see signs that Bally (or whomever) did try to get things out there, such as programming information. Weird, that so few years later, other companies were so insanely good (in comparison) at releasing things like programming manuals. Guess I had taken that stuff for granted? I'm used to the whole "digital archaeology" thing, from the perspective of someone investigating a system, after it's commercial death. But seeing those users having to do stuff like that, right up front, when the system's initial launch and library were still basically brand new!? Wow!! That was trippy!? Cool that there's a sense of humor involved, throughout all of the episodes I've listened to. Gotta say another thanks to Chris Plus Plus, for his funny asides and so forth. (But Adam's not as dry in his commentary as he seems to think he is.) Glad to see that Dominic got a shout-out (in an earlier podcast) for his opening theme music contributions. Having known him since he was like, what, negative six or so, it's been a cool thing for me to see him grow into adulthood and to always be creative; even if it's "creative" mixed with a healthy dose of intelligent parents, which not everyone is used to. That mix of "nerd" and "artist" is something Dominic's parental influences have, to be proud of. Overall: You're onto something, guys. Keep it up! I'm being entertained, and I'm learning "new" stuff as I go. Looking forward to the next episode(s) ... !! -- Ward Shrake --

Thanks muchly!

Thanks! I've bookmarked that web site, and will check it out. Might take me a while, what with all that's going on around here ... but it's "on my list of to-do's" now, and I intend to give it a good look-see before too long. With that said, though, we should probably get back to the thread's subject of Multicarts for the Bally Astrocade, before I get us in trouble.

I'll totally trust Adam's memory on the "why wasn't that title screen visible, front-and-center," on that m'cart I once made. Where at, Mr. Jeff? Point the way, and I'll see if I can't pop in from time to time.

What he said! That ("War") game wasn't around, back when I was making my multi-carts, or it would have been probably been something like the "dips all set to zero, or all set to one" mode ... with maybe WoW as the other. But I always liked that system's version of Space Invaders, too ... and there are other cool ones that were fun to play. In the end, I relied in large part on Adam ("BallyAlley") and Mike (White), to suggest what programs were on there, in those two major or no-brainer "dip positions".

I can't resist saying this: "good for you!" (But don't take that as a bad thing, against any of the other games!)

Adam ("BallyAlley") just pointed me to this thread. I've read it all, top to bottom. Coolness, seeing people still playing with this stuff. As for that bottom label: if memory serves, that only made it onto the first (few?) batches of carts, because I was using the Bally-made cart cases at first; but then, due to shortages in those, had to switch case types. Off-hand, I don't recall how many of the "double label" ones went out to various people who bought one of those carts that I once made. (But no longer make: sorry!) If that info is stored or written down, anywhere, it'd probably be that ridiculously long FAQ I once wrote. Adam's site probably has a copy of it, "somewhere". I should mention -- (for no major reason, other than General Nerdiness or "information completism" I suppose?) -- that the bottom side of the carts that did have that second label, aren't showing a totally completed circuit board. What's shown, through the "cracks" as it were, is a somewhat un-stuffed or only-partially-assembled circuit board. That is, it looks like some of the jumper wires and such, which had to be there for it to operate, and that had to be there or it wouldn't work, aren't yet soldered on. I suppose that makes that image sort of a glimpse at the process of making those carts, by hand -- in that the image shows it partly, but not completely, "done". As for that cool-looking multi-cart screen: Adam, maybe my memory of such things is just mush right now, but I don't recall that one. Are you 100% sure it was ready to go, when I first made those carts? It seems like something I would have thought was very cool, and would have wanted to include -- so I'm at a loss myself, to understanding why that wasn't on the carts I once made, those dozen or whatever years ago, now? I could be mistaken, but the only reason that jumps to mind is that, maybe, the screen was done later?

Thanks, Adam and Chris, for sharing this bit of "new" gaming fun with the public! (And Bill, for chiming in!) I gotta say that while my last-minute pre-release testing period wasn't super-lengthy or detailed, hopefully no super-major bugs snuck through (shouldn't have! seemed to work ok for me) ... and it was definitely still good clean fun running around and killing hi-level beasties with single off-hand swats! It felt good breaking out that pair of programs, and radically increasing character specs to ridiculous levels, after 30 years of not having played with my old "cheating" program. Anyway ... enjoy!

I like what you did there. The idea of mapping what's there, and documenting it in detail, is cool in itself. You know I feel you do fine work in that regard, so there's not much "new" I can say on that part of things. (Other than "Fine work, as usual, my friend".) The "in the spirit of the original writings" additions you made to the backstory or "vibe" add something really cool. I've enjoyed your past additions in that mode or spirit, and feel you really nailed things. (Again.) This time, though, it feels like you'd taken it up a notch. (Using "Scarfoot" as a play on "Nailfoot" as just one example.) What you're doing makes the "deepening the gameplay" experiences, feel "even deeper" and more immersive than before. And that's a good thing for fans of these cool old dungeon-style games.

That wasn't exactly what I had meant ... but as the saying goes, I suppose it's "close enough for government work". Just to clarify: once I had seen that posting (#28, above) I had dropped the thought of someone perhaps doing a "port" or conversion of the C64 program ... but I hadn't "announced" that mental drop of that prior idea. So, having abandoned that thought, my more-recent comments were much more along the lines of "just observations". But no biggie, either way.

Coolness! That's very close to the sort of thing I was thinking of! I know from having used the Cross Ref program on the C64 "forever," that having the variables sorted, alphabetically, in the program's output listing, is just absolutely the way to go if you're trying to actually analyze the program you're studying / trying to make more efficient or readable, etc. No question in my mind, there. "Sorted" rocks! The Quick Ref program's output, within the sub-listing for each variable, is pretty much how Cross Ref does the "variables" portion of its listing ... but with "repeats" included. I'm not used to seeing that. The code for Butterfield's program didn't list the same variable two or more times, in cases where it appeared more than once on the same line. Guess that's a personal preference type of thing. Either way, you still end up with the same essential information -- even if, arguably, it's easier to read things the way that Butterfield listed his output. I guess the argument could be made that the Quick Ref way of doing things gives a person more information? (Again: I'm just not used to that.) That sorted list of numeric constants is pretty cool. The Cross Ref program on the C64 didn't have that feature. I can see how that would be pretty useful to have. Cool! The summary table shown is a new-to-me idea. I'd have to actually put it to use, to see how useful it would really be -- but more info is (almost) always a good thing. The one thing that the Quick Ref program's output listing seems to be missing, however, at least when compared to the Cross Ref program for the Commodore computer line, is a way to show which line or lines in the program under study, "calls" which other lines. To me, that was 90% of the point of such programs. Having put that feature to use, over and over and over, over the years, I consider it absolutely a "must" for such programs. (Especially with BASIC code written in a style that's as "hard to follow" as what I'm seeing in the "Temple of Apshai" code. Gosub calls, apparently ending with a sudden GoTo. Several different possible RETURN exit points, from Gosub's. Etc.) The best analogy I can come up with, to explain what I'm seeing in the "Temple of Apshai" BASIC code on the Commodore (and other) lines of computers, is that the program is written much like one of those "pick a path" books. Same logic applies to the code. It's not written in the sort of modular or "black box" style that's easy to follow, visually, when a person is trying to "trace" the flow of what's actually happening. With the sort of thinking that easy-to-follow code is wrapped around, each major sub-section of the code does one specific thing. There's one entry point, for every place in the program that "calls" that module. There's some decisions made, and some work done. And then, there's a single exit point. "Enter; do stuff; exit". Really easy to follow. That's exactly what the "Temple of Apshai" code is NOT doing! Again, the "Pick a Path" style of thinking is what's going on in that code. So, having an analysis program which tells you what lines call what other lines, is necessary to understanding the actual flow of that particular code. Question: did the Quick Ref program simply not have that (awesome!) feature? Or is it, perhaps, a user-selectable option; which we're just not yet fully aware is there? Quick Ref seemed to do so much, so well, that it would be a major shame if that "big" feature wasn't included. All in all ... good to know that such a nifty program is available, over in Atari Land! Adam's review, and what I've seen in the uploaded output listing, makes it sound like a really useful program!

Cool to know. I was mainly curious about "how the other half live" ... and you've given me some good input on that! (Thanks!) So as not to pull things TOO much farther off-topic, I'll be quiet and behave, and basically just "lurk" ... but before Running Silent, I'll mention in passing that I just now did the Cross Ref thing on the "Temple of Apshai" BASIC code, for the VIC-20 version of the game. And passed the resulting reference files to Adam / BallyAlley, via email. Figuring that, if nothing else, it might be half-interesting to see if there's any huge similarities or differences in how the code was written, on the Atari 8-bits versus the VIC-20. I'll leave any follow-up on that to Adam, though ...

I suspect that what appeared in "Compute!" as a type-in was probably a fairly well-known PET-based program, first ... and there's probably source code for it, via that route; even if it turns out there's no easily-available source code for that program on the C64. But seeing how good Butterfield was, in that way: it's probably out there, commented and all; for both / all versions. Off-hand, though, I wouldn't know where either the earlier or the Compute!-published version's source code might have been printed. This next bit is probably sorta wandering a bit more off-topic, so I'll just mention it in passing and then "shut up" about it, so things can get back to their regular "flow". Okay. Bear with me, for a moment ... In taking a peek (BASIC pun sorta half-intended) to see if Jim Butterfield's book(s) on writing Machine Language code for Commodore computers might have that Cross Ref program in there (no luck, at least per the table of contents) ... and then doing a bit of half-random searching to see what else is "out there" ... I came across this link to what used to be some Commodore VIC-20 web info I once had online ... which reminded me the date of the program that RUN magazine once ran (May/June 1991) about a "profiler" (BASIC program speed analysis) program that I had adapted from another author's prior code. https://www.digitpress.com/the_digs/vic20/texts/rundisks.htm This also came up, in my next searches ... https://archive.org/stream/Re-Run_1991-06_IDG_Communications_US/Re-Run_1991-06_IDG_Communications_US_djvu.txt Which, again, I probably shouldn't mention here -- (too hard, anyway) -- but once we get to where Adam (BallyAlley) is happy with his output / program choice / etc., I might ask this as a follow-up to my original question (if there was a Cross Ref program, similar to Butterfield's, for the Atari 8-bit computer line). That future question being: back in the day, or even now, was anything similar to that "profiler" program that RUN magazine had printed (and also once had on a ReRun disc) available for the Atari 8-bits? ... but, again ... we'll save that discussion for later. Meanwhile ... back to the original topic; already in progress!