CV Gus

There is a trak-ball controller for the Atari 2600- would that work for the 7800 Centipede?

But I have- for years now! As for the 7800 module- I'm not so sure that it would've worked. The 32X, the Sega CD, the Supercharger, the ADAM- it does not seem as though any upgrade has ever really done all that well. DracIsBack- Rewrite what? I said it was a RUMOUR. And the at least 3 million sales is common knowledge. What did in Coleco were decisions that could not do anything but doom them, even if the CV had sold 10 million. The 2600 was big only because it was there from the 1970s. By your logic, neither the Genesis nor the Super Nintendo should have been considered at all successful, since the NES was everywhere. Companies made games for the 2600 because it was there, established. But how long could that have gone on? The CV and 5200 were the next step up, and so those of us who bought one were stepping into the next generation. Those two were about the future. You also seem to miss your own point- by continuing on with the 2600, Atari had to spread itself very thin. Arcade, computers, 2600, 5200- very thin. Therefore, the 5200's biggest threat may not have been the CV, but Atari's own 2600! And if what you say is true, then wouldn't the 7800 have had the same problem in 1984? Every bit of effort anywhere for the 2600 was that much less for anything else. Part of the problem was eras. The 2600 won out in the earliest days of the programmable. It was, therefore, the cornerstone of it all, and so was the system. ANY new system- even if the NES had appeared in 1982- was going to have a serious problem with what defined home video gaming at that point. But sooner or later, it would have to be tried. That's what the CV and 5200 were about. Of course, neither one at that point was going to match the 2600 for "reputation" or numbers. But unless you would like us to still be with the 2600 instead of the Playstation, wouldn't someone somewhere have had to have tried it? The point I'm trying to make is that the whole post-2600 era was handled all wrong by everyone. When Atari itself decided to put out the 5200- for whatever reason- they themselves decided to challenge their own 2600. At that point, they should have known that they'd be committed to the 5200 for at least a few years, unless sales were so horrible that nobody in the universe would have blamed them for dropping it. But they had decided to dump the 5200 as early as 1983 in favor of the 7800, so the crash had nothing to do with that. This could only alienate Atari fans. Coleco, for its part, fouled up with the ADAM computer. I live near Amsterdam, NY, and so have met quite a few Coleco employees. Did you know that, for the 1983 holiday season, they not only halted CV production, but would just hire people off the street, teach them some basic soldering, and then have the ADAMs assembled on crude plywood tables- no sanitation or protection against static electricity was considered? This is one reason why so many were defective. What's more, it was a clumsy oddball up against established computers of that time. It just couldn't have been expected to work. And Coleco foolishly believed in that "video games are dead; the future is with computers" bit. I'll give Atari credit for not believing that, since they were going to release the 7800 in late 1984. But either way, both companies went down, but for different reasons. It's a bit sad, really- what would both the CV and 5200 have done by 1986, if only given a chance? Homebrewers have given us a good idea.

Part of the problem is that these sort of threads never show how these specs can be applied. For example, over at the AGH, they mention that you'd expect the processor of the CV to be 2X as fast as the 5200's. But since they are different- well, what they say in essence is that the CV can move faster, but the 5200 can "carry" twice as much, so both do the same amount of work. The problem with that is that if all there was to it was that, then any Z-80 processor with twice the speed can be considered the same (practically) as a 6502 (I think that's the number). But aren't there things in which the Z-80 is better, and likewise the 6502? It can't be as simple as one lugs twice as much as the other! The idea that the CV is inferior to the 5200 in all ways is ludicrous. The quality of the games themselves would indicate otherwise, and looking at Galaxian, Joust, Pac-Man (Atarisoft), and Dig Dug would indicate that Atari itself did not think so- or were they better with an "alien" system than their own, based on technology they had for some time? As always, the CV beat the 5200 in certain areas, but the 5200 had it in others. There was no way you could do Mr. Do!'s Castle as nicely on the 5200. While the 5200 had 256 colors and shades to the CV's 16, look at the resolution available if you wanted the 256: not so good. The 200X320? Black and white. And again, both systems put out images differently, so even then there's more to it. I've always wondered why the monkeys in Kangaroo are translucent. Scrolling- yipe, here we go again!- this depends on what you want. Obviously, the sort of scrolling needed for Defender, Nova Blast, Galaxian, and Moonsweeper were no problem. Likewise, multi-field star scrolling (Cosmo Fighter 2). So for many kinds of games, the actual abilities are equal. The problem is with other kinds. Anything you can draw on a CV can be smoothly scrolled vertically, but not horizontally. Thus, Xevious would look better on a CV than a horizontal equivalent. So you either make do with less detail/smooth scrolling, or more detail/choppy scrolling. But what limits exist for the 5200? As I recall, with Atari computers, you could "draw" several entirely different screens, and then scroll them as if it was one big screen. But to do such a thing, wouldn't that take considerable amounts of memory? Those screens may look great, but the memory cost must be something else. Wouldn't, therefore, a system with more have an advantage? In other words, if you wanted to do a version of Mr. Do! with as many screens as possible, all else the same, which would have an advantage? Memory for games was usually given as "32K for the CV, 16K for the 5200." But as many pointed out, the CV needed at least some of that memory to do things "built in" for the 5200 (such as scrolling). This may be true, but only in cases where such routines were needed. RPGs like Lord of the Dungeon did NOT need such things, so in that respect, the CV could likely handle larger games without memory expansion. One area the 5200 would have an advantage is corporate. If the CV and 5200 can both do a certain kind of scrolling equally well, but with the 5200 it's mostly built in, then every extra hour spent on the CV for that is an hour less for something else. As for those games, DracIsBack, it would be interesting to see how Opcode would handle it (evil cackle)...give up? As for the threads- aren't they all about systems that stood during Reagan's first term? So why ask, by being here, we have already doomed ourseeeellllvvvessss... As you can see, I'm not feeling very technical today. I never thought Obama would get in, but for the first time, the one I voted for won! From 1984 on that had never happened! Maybe people are fed up with the same old garbage, AT LAST the post Baby-Boomers are a force to be reckoned with! Watch out, Judge Joe "Bully" Brown! You loudmouths better stop thinking you can just go on pushing the two younger generations around with impunity!!!!

Well, you're right about the CV version- although it could have easily looked better. First, making a multi-colored gun, with the bullet on top (a-la Galaxian craft) would've done wonders. As for the mushrooms- as we all know, the CV can show 2 colors/space line. Sooo-ooo-ooo-o b=Black (background) P=Purple B=Blue (oh, looky- color! I'll use it! ) *12345678 1bbbPPbbb 2bbPPPPbb 3bBBBBBBb 4PBBBBBBP 5PPPPPPPP 6bbbBBbbb 7bbbBBbbb 8bbbBBbbb Of course, this is just a prototype effort, so for the actual television screen some modification may be needed. As for the 7800 2-player option- I keep forgetting that up here it's not the same as elsewhere, where there are many more people. Sorry.

In it's time, the CV was estimated to have sold no less than 3-4 million consoles. Pretty big crumb. If not for the Crash, those figures may have more than doubled. The 2600 was not as big a factor by 1982 as you think. The reason the 2600 was so big was because it prevailed in the earliest days. But it was still a 2600, and by 1982 was no longer capable of bringing home too many arcade games- and computer-to-console games, same problem. People wanted something more, and when the CV was first advertised, we were in awe. I'll never forget the excitement around it back in that summer of `82. Ladybug. Smurf. Cosmic Avenger. Venture. You must remember that it is rumored that it was the 7800 that was supposed to have been the "real 5200." That is why it was backward-compatible, because it was supposed to have come after the 2600. The 5200 was rushed out to match the CV. While you may be right from a certain point of view, human psychology was not considered. By dumping the 5200 owners, for whatever reason, Atari came across as not caring for its customers. The Crash and stupid marketing decisions are what doomed the CV; but crash or no crash, it was over for the 5200 owners in just 1 1/2 years. Even the 7800 and Sega CD and 32X did better than that. What Atari had to consider back in 1983 was how well the 7800 would do against the CV, as that was the only real problem at that point. The CV had the 2600 module, so if you wanted to play 2600 games, you were covered there already. Keep that in mind- the 7800's 2600 compatibility was no real defense against the CV, because any CV owner- present or future- knew that he was covered there. Hell, with all of the switches on the CV 2600 module, it could play 2600 games the 7800 couldn't (such as the few that needed the COLOR/BW switch). But how significant was this by 1984 in any case? And I think that the CV 2600 module plays more 2600 games than the 7800. The point, really, was this: one can understand a system being retired when arcade technology has clearly outdated the system. This is why people were receptive to the 5200: arcade games had greatly advanced since the mid-1970s. But the 5200-7800 switch just, well, it just wasn't there. I can't blame Atari in 1982- it was a tough call. If they had waited until the 7800 project was fully ready, then the CV would've dominated the market the way the NES did some years later. If they rushed out the 5200 to counter this, then they would have to wait until the 7800 technology was increasingly dated. But once they DID come out with the 5200, then they owed it to their customers to stick with it for at least a few years. Ironically, had they done this, then the 7800 would have been improved, and it would have been a better match for the NES. Note- Coleco DID have an earlier system- the Telstar Arcade. The CV clearly demonstrated that Coleco had learned from that one, and made a much better system. They handled it right. Until that stupid ADAM computer.

That says it all. Although the 7800 version does allow for simultaneous 2-player action, that is not too significant in 2008. The 5200 version has better sound, and overall the graphics are better, too. It looks more like the arcade version, even if the 5200 version has a wider screen. With the trak-ball, it's really good. My choice: the 5200 version. (By the way- how is the 5200 Millipede?)

Well, first: 1) Big and sleek is right...TOO damn big. That thing is so big, I've had trouble storing it. A CV, on the other hand, can go anywhere a 5200 can, plus more. I like the overall CV look better, although the red LED on the 5200 is nifty. 2) Ever see Congo Bongo? Bleah. A problem is that some 5200 games are no better than the 2600 versions: Super Breakout and Space Invaders being two examples. But the 5200 does have a good library. Ms. Pac-Man, Blueprint, and others, like Berzerk and Qix, are strong points. But it never had as many as the CV, esp. Alcazar and Gateway to Apshai (RPGs), Fortune Builder, etc. And I do like Robotron: 2084, and for the 5200, Star Raiders- so far, the CV lacks as good a first-person shooter. 3) Any system can do that- but Atari was smart enough to allow both methods of play. Score one for the 5200 here. 4) Frankly, except for Missile Command, those controllers were a disaster. Qix and Berzerk especially, but most others, too. The difference between the 5200 standard and a digital controller is like night and day. A more serious problem was compatibility. The CV used a 9-pin design, so most controllers for the Vic-20, Commodore-64, Atari 2600 or 7800, and even the Genesis, do work on a CV. But a 5200 really needs a 5200 controller, due to that weird analog design. Also, those things break down too easily, and are difficult to repair because in part of those "strips." I will grant what you didn't mention- when making certain specific "specialty" controllers, such as a light gun or a paddle controller, the 5200 is much easier to design for, assuming you have a 15-wire/pin cord. In fact, since every 5200 controller has TWO potentiometers in it, even a 2-port 5200 can, like the 2600, have four players. This would be much trickier for a CV. 5) No better than a CV Roller Controller. That said, if you have one for the 5200, then Centipede for the 5200 is so much better than the 7800 version. In fact, it has all of that "something" from the arcade version. The best reasons for a 5200? Well, the reasons I picked up one a decade ago at a townwide garage sale, and after hours of effort, was able to fix it: Nostalgia for a happier time. When, during a test- did I get it running?-..."CHICKEN! FIGHT LIKE A ROBOT!" Berzerk. Defender. Qix. Star Raiders. Ms. Pac-Man and Pac-Man, the latter somehow better-playing than the NES version. Blueprint, and now, with my paddle controller, Super Breakout. I do prefer it to my 7800, overall.

One of my recent posts here dealt with why the 7800 may have been doomed from the first. Essentially, it was like this: even if the Crash of 1984 had NOT happened, the 5200 was already finished. Atari had planned to abandon it and go with the 7800. However, there were two problems with this: 5200 owners would feel betrayed and would not likely have trusted Atari with the 7800, esp. since most of its first-run games were simply 7800 versions of existing 5200 games. Atari alienated them before the crash, as many letters to game magazines of the times indicated. Also, in 1983, when the 7800 was planned, the only conceivable rival to it would have been the CV. But CV owners had already made their choice between the CV and 5200; we were NOT going to abandon the established CV, with its vast library of games, for the 7800. It was a case of "what part of NO didn't you understand?" Esp. since the 7800 back then (and maybe now) did not seem much better than the CV...or 5200, for that matter. And we also were suspicious of a company that just dumped its customers like that. It was all done too hastily. The 5200 was rushed out to meet the threat of the CV. The 7800 was to have been introduced too soon after the 5200, and if they had waited much longer, the 7800 technology would have risked becoming too antiquated. It was a lose-lose situation. Atari would have been wise to have stuck with the 5200, and only after enough time had passed, introduced an enhanced 7800. But here's a question I should have asked before- for you 5200 owners back in those days, would you have preferred Atari to have stuck with the 5200, or to have dumped it in early 1984 for a 1984 7800 release? If it had been up to YOU, what would you have said?

Oh, I don't know `bout that- the NES did pound the superior SMS in sales, didn't it? Don't forget how much effort into expanding the 2600's abilities there was, but the other systems from that time? Not much. But the X-Box 360 under the control of the Tramiels likely couldn't have beaten the RCA Studio 2. So what chance did the 7800 have, even if (this occurred to me years later) the whole 1983 7800 idea wasn't doomed from day one?

Opcode, if money wasn't so hopelessly tight for me this year, I'd certainly buy almost every game you've come out with. Hopefully, maybe this year I can scrape up enough for Pac-Man Collection. Lack of money is what's stopping several hardware projects- if not for some scrap electronics, some from 30 years ago, I wouldn't even have gotten this much done. Any current screenshots? And do you have Super Pac-Man hidden in there somewhere? Hope all goes well for you!

In theory, you're right about the op-amp- but you have to keep in mind that the tricky part is range. With a 5200 gun, ANY measurable difference will do, whether you are right on top of the screen or 6 feet away. But there comes a point where the light is so diffused by distance, that it won't work. I'm closer to getting it, much more so (even in 1983 op-amps might react to a difference of less than 1/100 of a volt (which can be done via 2 resistors)). But I want it to be easy to use, so I'm going to tinker around with several ideas. As for paddle controllers- I'm trying to make one that does not require outside power sources. The design is simple enough, but man, just try to build it! Funny thing- in theory, the older 5200s could have paddle games for EIGHT players! Since each controller has 2 potentiometers, that's 2X4; so even the 2-port 5200s can handle a 4-player version of Warlords. On the CV, however, this would prove tricky indeed. So while the CV pounds the 5200 on controllers overall, in other specific homebrew areas, the 5200 has the edge. If someone programmed Arkanoid for the 5200, I already have my paddle controller for it. For the CV, you'd have to use the SAC spinner (not very practical), the Turbo module (would lack the feel of the arcade version), or the Roller Controller- same problem, though it would work. To build a CV controller for such a game, however, you'd likely use the same circuit design as the spinners. No problem, but how to activate it? Smooth motion would need maybe up to 250 pixel-moves (consider paddle size). This means that the spinner, with its 2 magnets, must be spun 125 times. Not overly fun. Therefore, in order to do it like a 5200 paddle controller, you'd have to have the dial spinning a larger wheel, with many out-of-sync contacts (like a 2600 Indy 500 controller, but with more). There are several ways of doing this, but none as easy as simply wiring a potentiometer with a series resistor. But for now, I'm going to focus on the 5200 Light Gun. It just needs that test cartridge, and I can fine-tune it. Then, since of course I will publish the design here, 5200 owners can have light gun games . Hopefully, CV owners will follow!

I'll say this again- this is the sort of game Atari should have come out with in the late 1980s. Who usually bought one? Older gamers. We often preferred the older games to the later ones, so, Atari should have been the system for older games. The NES had the younger ones. Superb work. You are an excellent programmer.

Actually, there is no analog-to-digital conversion needed with the 5200. When you point the light gun directly at a light source, it is exactly as if you are moving the joystick up just a teeny bit. The game program is told to react to that as a "hit." I wouldn't want to do an analog-to-digital conversion with any console or computer capable of doing that; it would be needless bother, and you can build an adjustment knob into the circuit so you could be more- or less- accurate. The simple fact is, anything capable of reading analog is going to be much easier to build a paddle or light gun for. For a paddle, a decent potentiometer will do. But for the CV, what you'll need is the spinner in the SAC in miniature. And with MANY out-of-sync contacts on the "wheel." Yes, it can be done, but man, just try to BUILD it. A real delicate, miniature nightmare. Once I found the 9-pin diagram for the CV and was able to compare it to those of the Vic-20 and Commodore-64, I knew that any answer to the CV light gun problem would have to be in the gun itself. There is an operational comparator which, even in 1983, can be set up to react to a very small difference in voltage (ON or OFF; digital), and there are other ways, too. Currently, I am trying out a few of them. But the problem is that tiny amount of light that you have to work with. Is there anyone here who'd program a simple test cartridge for me for the 5200 gun? I cannot do that part myself, I'm afraid.

Both versions let you do that- but while Atari sold a holder for the two 5200 controllers, no such thing was offered for the 7800.

Centipede was the first big game designed by a woman. The choice of pastels was because she wanted it to be interesting to look at. Also note that most objects are curved in that game. Political correctness aside, marketers keep these things in mind when trying to sell to women.

Back in 1988, I bought a 7800. Shortly after, I bought Robotron: 2084 for it. Back in 1998, I found an Atari 5200. One of the games with it was...Robotron: 2084. A couple of years ago, I built my digital joystick. Or was it a year ago, well, whatever... As a result, I've had both games for quite some time now. My choice? The 5200 version. In order for a home version to be successful, it needs that "something" the arcade version had. The atmosphere of the times. The sort of satisfaction an effective home version can give. The 5200 Space Invaders didn't have this, while Berzerk and Qix did. The 5200 version of Robotron has it. It has that "something." You can just feel what it must have been like in 1983, when the arcade version was recent, you the 5200 owner got the home version, and were NOT disappointed. Granted, it has flaws. The movement is choppier. The color GREEN is altogether missing, making it a bit tricky to tell certain things apart (e.g. the Hulks and Mommies). The 7800 version is smoother, clearer, has the color green, things look more like they did in the arcade version. But the 5200 version has the borders, including the "invisible" one of every ninth level. The explosions, esp. of the Grunts, is better. The sound is better, and you being hit is better, too. It too has a nice title screen. Somehow, it's just more satisfying. The screen sequences are as faithful as the 7800 version, too. Does the 5200 version have the 2084-mines? Somehow, I can't remember just now.

An "old-fashioned" television works sort of like a film- pictures being "flashed" (or in the case of a tv, "drawn,") quickly. I believe 30 times/second with the tv. Since the human eye can, at best, not detect any change happening any faster than 12 times/second, you see what appears to be a continuous movement, rather than a choppy one. I think an NES bases that dark screen-and-then-dark screen with white block sequence on that particular mode of operation. If you try it on a screen that does it some other way, it'll be thrown off, and not work. Sort of like the way images in Tower Toppler on the 7800 works, but only when you play it on the sort of televisions the 7800 was meant to be used with. Oddly enough, a simpler light gun game might still work where a more sophisticated one won't. Would the resolution of the tv matter? I'd imagine that if you could play regular NES games on the tv, then it wouldn't.

The problem is how the gun actually detects the difference, and how the console uses it. It's the difference that matters; finding the "neutral" position doesn't matter. My design has the cursor in Missile Command above the middle (it uses the vertical control). When there is an explosion on the screen, and you are pointing the gun right at it, the cursor moves up slightly. To the 5200, that means "the resistance in the vertical circuit has gone down a bit, so move the cursor up a bit." The sort of light gun I'm building, like many others, uses either a photoresistor, or a phototransistor. Light from the television screen hits the phototransistor (usually focused through a lens), and this causes the resistance to go down- more current can flow. Slightly. Any console with analog detection- be it a Vic-20, Commodore-64, Atari 2600/5200/7800- is not too difficult to deal with. Here's what I think you're missing, BigO- with the 5200, all one has to do is tell the game that if there is ANY difference between the black screen and black screen/white block, then it can assume that you "hit" the target. You can even adjust that difference, if need be. It can be anywhere from 1 Ohm to, well, whatever. That's how the thing works. When the screen is black, no light can be hitting that phototransistor. When the screen is black and has that white block, then one of two things can happen: either you are pointing the gun at a black area of the screen (no difference: MISS), or you are pointing the gun at the block (slight difference: HIT). What makes it worse is that the further you are away from the screen, the less light can hit the gun. It's not linear; it's exponential. Put the gun right on the screen, and measure how much light hits the cell. Move it back one foot, and notice how much less hits it. Move it back another foot, and the drop is much greater than the first time. As a result, the difference in resistance is going to be pretty minor. VERY VERY minor, in fact. This is not too big a problem with the 5200, which after all is all about analog and can detect even the slightest difference, but a CV? A CV is all digital. This means all or nothing. This means that you cannot tell the CV to assume you "hit" something if there is a "slight difference in current/resistance;" which is how light guns usually work. To get a CV light gun to work, you must figure out how to switch a current (be it from the fire control, keypad button, or directional control) from on to off or off to on just by that ever-so-slight difference in resistance. And that, believe me, is not easy. Especially if you want to be say, seven feet from the screen. So far, I'm getting somewhat closer. It's going to take a circuit that really is that sensitive, and even so, I'll probably have to add control knob so you can adjust the sensitivity. You'd have to get it riiiiigghhhhhhttt on the borderline between off and on, so that ANY decrease in resistance (via a series resistor set-up, most likely) will do it. An operational-amplifier, which can act "digital" by a slight difference in resistance or voltage (which can be done with a certain kind of two-resistor set-up) most likely. Since my guide book is from 1983, I assume that something more effective now exists. Again, score one for the 5200. Likewise, if you want to build a paddle controller for the CV- it wasn't too hard for the 5200.

Are you "sirius?"

Missile Command. Star Raiders. Notice how moving the stick a little turns you slowly, while moving it more moves you more quickly. Pole Position. Super Breakout. Except for Star Raiders, none of the above can be properly played with a digital controller.

It's not quite that easy, I'm afraid. With a 5200, it was not too difficult, since the whole 5200 control scheme is based on analog- that is, differences in resistance. Lower resistance, object moves left or up (which is why, when you unplug a controller, the cursor in Missile Command goes down and right- infinite resistance). So for a 5200 light gun, you could just compare two resistances: the black screen (no light/high resistance) to the one with the block- if you are pointing the gun at the block, some light will hit the photocell, and there'll be less resistance- something the 5200 can compare (if you are NOT pointing the gun at the block, then it'll be the same as the black screen). It would be the same as if you moved the joystick a bit up or to the left. In other words, it's something like this: 1) You pull trigger. Sequence begins. 2) Whole screen goes black for an instant- maybe just 1/30th of a second (typical television frame rate). No light can be hitting photocell in gun. 3) Next, where target was- duck, clay disc, witch, whatever- a white block appears for another split second. From here, one of two things will happen: either you are NOT pointing the gun at the block, in which case you are pointing at black screen- the resistance will be identical. Game assumes you missed. If you ARE pointing at the block, then light will hit the photocell, resistance will be lower, thus more current- the signal will be different than 1). Game assumes you hit. 4) If there is more than one target, and you miss the first, the first block vanishes, and is replaced by a second. It then works the same way. First off, I have never personally studied any off-the-shelf light gun so I'm operating on assumptions and generalities to a large degree: I understand the technology using a photoresistor or phototransistor to detect the light possibly resulting in an analog signal in the first stage, but the console itself shouldn't necessarily have to interpret an analog value as a hit or miss. If there is a particular threshold value which indicates detection, the analog value could easily be converted to a digital "hit/miss" level. It's not so much the analog itself, as the difference in the two analog signals. THIS is how the game assumes you hit or miss. To do it the way you suggest- digital- would probably have to be done in the gun itself. And that's going to be a problem, since the amount of light- and thus, the difference in resistance- is small. I know of no chip or gate that is so sensitive and precise that it would stay "off" with black screen, but would go "on" when light hits the photocell. It might quite literally require a mini-5200 control set-up in the gun, one that can compare the differences and then switch on or stay off. I have the pin-diagram for the CV, and I also have it for the Commodore-64. Both are 9-pin, but when it comes to the ones involving analog (paddle controllers) on the C-64, you can see a difference between it and the CV. The "paddles" for a CV would actually be a pulse; which is digital (it is similar to the Indy 500 controllers for the 2600). Building a similar light gun for the C-64 would not be too difficult. The only "easy" way might- just might- be a parallel resistor set-up. If I could establish the near-exact resistance-threshold to a CV controller circuit (which would take a multi-tester much better than the ancient beat-up one I have), then using such a set-up might do it. I'll try a crude set-up tonight. It sure ain't going to be easy. Score one for the 5200 here.

Now you can see why I'm having such trouble figuring out a CV version- a typical light gun works by noting differences in resistance, just like a game with paddle or 5200 controllers. If the CV does not have this in the unit, then this is going to be a serious problem!

I used an NES zapper as the basis. Remember, I do not have enough money to do these things from scratch. But you can't just simply adapt the wires to different 5200 wires. I literally had to ruin the gun, isolating the key components, and then rewiring them in an entirely different way (such as the photodarlington transistor arrangement). What's more, to get it so ONLY by fully pulling the trigger will it activate, well, that required adding a component from a 1970's VCR. The result is a lightgun that is much more sensitive to light than it was before. What it is now is really similar to the lightguns of the 1970's pre-programmable systems, like the Unisonic and Telstar Marksman. In fact, that's what it was all along- I just redesigned it. If you've never played Duck Hunt or Skeet Shoot on the NES, let me tell you that it is identical to those primitive "shoot-the-white-block-on-a-black-screen" games of the early 1970s. Really! When you pull the trigger, try hitting the "pause" button. If you get it right, you'll notice that the whole fancy display screen is gone, and the only thing is a white block where the duck or disc was. As far as I can tell, first, for a split-second, the screen goes all black. Then, the white block appears. In the gun is a phototransistor. If light hits it, it allows current to go through (less resistance). The game picks up on this. Thus, it compares the black screen (no light, no current) to the white block screen (possible current). If there is a difference between the two screens, the game assumes that you were pointing the gun at the target, and records a hit. In the case of two targets, after the first block is shown, if there is no hit recorded, the block is replaced by a second block, where the second target was. The two are NEVER shown together with such a set-up. It had always struck me as strange that, except for the Coleco Telstar Arcade- which sold very poorly- practically none of the first, second, or third generation systems ever had light gun games. I hope that this thing will pass the final test- with a test cartridge- because if it does, then 5200 owners will have a whole new genre of games as a possibility (the rest is up to the homebrewers!). There were a number of such games around, such as Witch Hunt.

http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=133224

I'd wanted it to be a surprise for the holidays, but it seems like I'm not going to get any further without letting you know what it is. http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=133224 Hopefully, someone can help...