WishItWas1984

Oh...duh. LOL Right, the same roms should garner the same filenames (wherever they come from) but the colors should be accurate. I appreciate the help.

Ok, that seems to suggest a reason for why it won't save the snapshots with the correct color via the Stella included on the R77 microSD image posted here. Would you be able to say where Stella draws the filenames for the F12 snapshots? Because if I knew that, then I could do all of this manually. For Pac-Man 4K, I understand it naming the file Pac-Man 4k.png, but the Amoeba Jump filename Stella created through me for a loop. No idea where that name came from. When you suggest using the PC version, I don't understand what you mean. The image offered here to flash to a microSD seems to be specifically created to work with the R77 and that's the platform I want to play on.

I'm using the latest build of the DirtyHarry Stella image on my R77 and I'm trying to add snapshots to games that are missing them. I connected a keyboard to hit F12, which kinda worked, but the images have color issues. Instead of the actual colors, everything is green. From the looks of it, anything black is saved as green. What's even weirder is that the naming convention is not making any sense, so I'm not sure how to manually add images to manually to "Stella > Snapshots" on the microSD. What I mean is, I already had "Amoeba Jump.png", but it didn't display. The BIN is named "Amoeba Jump". When I hit F12 for it, the file name is saved as "Amoeba Jump (R77) (DionoiD).png". However, when I go to Pac-Man 4K, which has a BIN name of "Pac-Man 4K" and no existing PNG, and hit F12, the file saves as "Pac-Man 4K.png"!! So I can't do this manually based on BIN name alone as it seems some other name is being utilized to connect them to Stella. If anyone has any help they can offer...either with why my snaps on the R77 are green or how to properly manually add them...I would be grateful. Thanks

I purposely posted the full-res image for anyone and everyone to use as they will. Have at it! However, I didn't make or scan the original. That was given freely as well elsewhere in the forum. I just did a little bit of Photoshopping to get it like this.

I stumbled on someone here sharing a hi-res image of the old 2600 box and made a 4K wallpaper out of it for my TV (It cycles art that I like as a slideshow as I have no more wall space for the real thing ) Figured I'd post it here since this is where I got the original file and I imagine there might be someone else who'd like it. Oh! If anyone has really hi-res boxart examples from anything from the 70s/80s, feel free to send them my way. I'd love to add more of this kind of packaging art to my TV "gallery".

Toys for Easter!? I got jipped. I'd have given back a little chocolate and some peeps for a new M.A.S.K. toy

I get it. You'd be morally awful to release say 100 black carts for $50 and 20 red ones for $100 just to poke at some collector's OCD. Some people are putting value into this NFT business, but if you feel like it's a bogus enterprise and won't take part in taking advantage of other's (seeming) stupidity, then you have to respect that.

You're right, it's all speculation. That's completely beside the point though, because how many will buy it and at what price point is irrelevant. The overhead and effort of selling digitally can be dropped to practically be non-existent. So even if you sell one, that's one more player and one more sale. Devs can do what they like though *shrug*

For an NFT release? I wouldn't pay anything. Like I said, I think it's stupid. For a normal ROM purchase of a game, it all depends. $5-20 maybe. Like, Avalanche I can see paying around $10. It's simplistic, but I can see it being addictive and fun with infinite replayability, like with Kaboom. For the new Audacity game, I'd say $20 cause of it's complexity and the talent behind it. I expect above-Homebrew quality.

Meh. As a collector (mostly of toys), I put all of the responsibility on the collector. If someone doesn't have the willpower to not buy something, that's on them. Just because Hasbro puts out the 472th version of Luke Skywalker, or someone releases a super-special ROM via NFT, doesn't mean anyone has to buy it.

Devs should definitely look into the whole NFT scene to release digital versions of their cart games. I mean, it's moronic and the dumbest thing since digital trading cards, but if enough people are willing to spend their money on this stuff instead of a normal transaction, I'm in to "own" a piece just so I can finally get a ROM for a game I want to play. LOL

True, the profit margin in a cart sale might be inflated way beyond what a digital sale could sustain because the extras and "deluxe" nature of it imports enough perceived value to get people on the hook. However, and this is something a lot are missing, is that the idea of it not being worth their time is nearly a non-existent issue. You don't need to create a digital storefront and payment processing services to sell a digital file. There's a bunch of different ways to grassroots the whole process and make it simple and easy. Especially if it's one guy who doesn't want to put much effort into it. Regarding your second point of it just being fun and something someone might want to release for free...no, I didn't acknowledge that. Because it's not part of the topic. The whole thing started as deciding to sell a cart and make money, but flat out refusing to sell digital. If someone wants to give me the ROMs I want for free, then I'm no dummy. I'll take that in a heartbeat. lol

"Hypothetically speaking, let's pretend..." That part of my comment is something I think you missed. lol I wasn't giving literal values. It was an example to prove a point that was brought up at somewhere in this thread regarding the notion that they don't sell well enough to bother. There was no context, so I was speculating that perhaps they mean it doesn't make enough money, which could be because it's not priced correctly. I agree that you wouldn't see "massive sales" either, whatever number constitutes "massive". That's beside the point though.

My point was that the size and type of a potential market or the system in question has no bearing on the core idea of selling a ROM. It's either economically feasible and easy, or not. And in this case (2600), it's rather easy. This speaks to your Nintendo vs. Sony/Microsoft comment. For Nintendo, restricting mediums is wrapped around so many other issues and implications, from cost to corporation success, that not a good comparison. Now, there are many reasons not to release a 2600 ROM, and I'm only arguing in this thread against those that are factually incorrect or are very likely to be so, based on history, economics, etc... If someone doesn't do it simply because they emotionally do not want to, with revenue and all that be damned, then so be it. There's nothing generally wrong with that.