Retro Rogue
-
Content Count
3,426 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Posts posted by Retro Rogue
-
-
-
Manual? There's supposed to be a manual? Awww, crap I knew I was supposed to be doing something........and here I thought Atari was just sending a check because they liked me.
-
Not to splinter the thread, but
cyber1.org is running a backend simulation of the old CDC Plato Network, if you have a copy of the Atari Homelink Plato software, you can sign up and dial into it and experience what Plato was like,
Well, what the scaled down home interfaces pimped out to home computers in the early 80's was like. Plato was designed with a certain interface in mind (touchscreen plasma), and a goal of a high response time, something 300 baud dialup on a limited graphics home pc just doesn't cut.
Check out this article for more info.
basically it was the features of todays Internet and Instant Messaging in the 70's and 80's
Instant messages, online multiplayer graphical games, etc. And in the 60's, 70's and 80's.
-
And on top of that, tell him he needs to rethink his "ages". 90's is the "golden age"?
Good thing this guy didn't make up the color coded homeland security threat system. Hmmmm...or maybe he did!
-
-
Got mine nib about 2 years ago for $400 - off of ebay of all place. Completely new and unused, was sitting in a back room of a music store as well (came with Cubase, SM124 monitor, and an extra boxed new 1040st for $15.)
My guess is there are still music stores out there that have them and other ST's in stock in the backrooms. Just gotta do the hunting.
As for there being no hard drive - my understanding is that the early shipments did not include hard drives in the unit. Mine didn't come with one either.
Tempest - There's plenty of stuff available on the web yet as well as software collections on CD-Rom. Here's a british site selling a bunch -
http://www.1632-sales.zenwebhosting.com/ac...tml&CatalogBody
"All Things Falcon" and the Crawley Crypt collections are good ones, as is "The Atari Compendium".
-
Hey guys, I just created a little FAQ for the Flashback 2. Take a look at it and let me know what else I can add or correct on it. I think I may have something wrong on the games list (Is Atari Climber still on the list?) so LMK.http://www.staticgamer.com/modules.php?mod...aflashback2_faq
Question number 5 - Reproduction is the correct word for it hardware wise. The Flashback 2's main chip is an exact reproduction of 2600 hardware in a single chip format. Case wise, it's of course changed a bit. And yes, the switches changed due to costs.
-
I don't see why Atari wouldn't have retained the software rights to its own computer games titles from the early '80s, despite the fact that many classic titles were licenses. I personally think that a stick containing such classics as "Defender", "Ms. Pac-Man", "Donkey Kong/ DKjr", "Asteroids", and perhaps "Crystal Castles" would be an excellent item. That C64 product seems to be selling well enough...Defender, Ms. Pac-Man, Donkey Kong, and Donkey Kong Jr. are not Atari titles however, and would all need to be relicensed by Midway, Namco, and Nintendo respectively. And personally, last thing I'd want to see is Crystal Castles with a stick. Possibly some sort of trak-ball plug-n-play would be interesting in the future.
-
I'm actually writing a review of it for CG.Com (as well as for AA's Stelladaptor, which will come first).
The production value is great, I enjoyed the layout. But buyers should understand that a) It's a European produced book and much of the content concerns the market from the European side of things. It's more of an attempt at an encyclopedia of the Euro market, though far from an actual encyclopedia. b) It's got factual errors, so don't take it as anything more than wonderful looking coffee table book in the same vein as High Score!
-
I take it wgungfu got a hold of you?
We had a conversation last night on IRC where I mentioned that the it looks like a version of Vector Asteroids I did was on the FB 2.0 and he acted like I slapped him in the face or something 
(even to the point of calling me a moron). 
Nice try. The moron comment didn't come until an hour and a half of going around in circles with you, after a very specific statement you made. It was said out of frustration of going around and around in circles with you. It was worse than trying to explain something to the black knight from monty python.
He kept insisting that you did your version of the Asteroids vector hack that will be on FB2, which I know.
The whole thing started when you stated in #rgvc "Yah, and it looks like my crappy Asteroids hack is on the FB2". (And so you can't try and twist that, the "crappy" was what you used in the intial description. I'm just repeating it.) The next hour and a half was spent going around in circles with you on the same points Curt just said. Likewise you stating it was fishy that Curt hadn't responded yet to your second reply.
My version of course was a simple hollowing out of the graphics.. i.e. a task which anyone with today's hack editors can do in under 2 minutes. My point to him however was nothing was changed in my simple 1998 hack except hollowing out the graphics. IF your hack simply does that, it's theoretically the same as my hack (whether it was "recreated" knowingly is besides the point). And if that's the case, then I do have a position that my asteroids vector hack, or at least someone elses RE-DOING of it... is on FB2.0. And I think that's cool
Semantics are a great thing, aren't they? Point being if they didn't see your rom or use your rom, it's not your hack on the FB2. Again, you stated "Yah, and it looks like my crappy Asteroids hack in on the FB2." I stated it's not your hack, Curt did it from scratch. Then we went for an hour and a half of going around in circles with you trying to pull stuff in to somehow draw a correlation between your hack and what Curt did. Just like above.
Granted I know it would only take but one pixel moved on an asteroid outline to make it different (at the very least) or including Thomas' and others multiple improvements. I don't know what additional changes you or others made and what version will be included. But am I wrong to at least take enjoyment in seeing the vector Asteroids on FB2.0 and thinking perhaps I had created something good? Wgungfu seemed to think so.
Never said such a thing. You (here we go again) stated point blank that "it looks like my crappy Asteroids hack is on the FB2". I stated over and over again, no, Curt worked it from scratch, didn't see anyone elses. Then you try and spin it that even if it's done similar to yours, it's derivitive of your hack because you did it first. I explained in order for something to be derivitive it has to come from it in the first place. You stated that still makes it derivitive. I then went on to explain that your hack could be seen as just a reverse of how the original 2600 version was created (vector first and then filled in). So it cold be put using your logic that your hack was derivitive. It was to show you the flaw in the logic, not state that you copied someone else as you claim I said below.
But I mean.. could you fault me for thinking it?
Initially, no. Pressing the point over and over again when told it didn't come from it, yes.
He really was going out of his way to put me down....
I did no such thing. That seems to be what you're trying to do here. If I want to put someone down, I don't spend an hour and a half trying to reason with them. Just doesn't take that long to put someone down.
eventually coming to the point where he claimed the vector hack is derivative of Atari's original prototype and I had copied them
That's not what I said, see above. Nice attempt at trying to twist my words.
(where he pulled that out, I have no idea).. but looking at the stuff he threw at me. Geezus christ I only said it looks like my vector asteroids (or someone's redoing of it) is on FB2.0.... and he had a cow.
Not quite. Nice try though.
[01:18] <wgungfu> Kam: Haha, you mean you didn't know the great NE did a hack of asteroids? I thought EVERYONE knew. Hehe.
Nice attempt at a sarcastic jab there.. sorry, but what a dork. I won't bore you with the rest of the log.
Uh, again not quite. How about the full hour before that statement was made that lead up to that. Where I stated Curt had nothing to do with that and you stated Thomas sent him some hacks. I stated he didn't use them. And then you stated everyone has seen your hack. I stated I hadn't before this thread. You proceeded to post Atariage links to hacked roms, and I stated as before I hadn't seen it. Then another 20 minutes again of going around in circles with you pulling more stuff out of the air in relation to the above and then Kamino joins the channel and states "Wait? NE146 did an Asteroids hack?" That's when I typed that statement finally. Then you (once again) refined your statement to "Well, atari fanatics know about it." Again, what would be the point of trying to bring up "everyone" has seen your hack other than to imply that Curt actually did see it and therefore there was still the possibility he copied your hack?
His hammered point was you did your hack and that it was done w/ no knowledge of mine. I gather his defensiveness was derived from a suspicion that I would be seeking something.. or credit for the version on fb?
As I already told you on the channel, nope. It was an hour and a half of trying to explain to you that your assumption was wrong. Afterwords I wrote to Curt mentioning that you were concerned that he hadn't answered a post from you (which he didn't notice) and asked him to answer. You're just running here trying to repeat selective statements to twist things and gain sympathy from people who weren't in on the conversation in the first place.
I assume wgungfu's...(assumptions on legal matters, etc.....)
Told you it wasn't already. Franklin, there is a certain group just waiting for this project to fail and will latch on to anything negative they can that might undermine it. We've (unlike the original Atari) gone out of our way to make sure all authors (homebrew/etc.) have been getting full credit for anything appearing on the FB2. Even to the point of asking how they want to be listed. When someone starts posting here and stating on #rgvc that it looks like their hack is on the FB2, *that's* why I spent an hour and a half (seemed like even longer) trying to explain over and over that it wasn't based off of your hack. If it was, you'd most certainly be getting credit in the documentation like everyone else. I'd be the first in line to make sure of it (probably to find that Curt already beat me to it)
And the condenscending Mr wgungfu (I am a 36 year old engineer by the way) can suck my nut.
I guess your statement just goes to prove that 36 year old engineers can act as childish as 6 year olds.
Quite honestly Franklin, we had gotten along just fine on #rgvc in the past. The lengths that you're going to try and twist things, and the manner at which you're going about everything makes me realize that maybe my past friendly conversations with you were imagined. That now we're seeing the real you.
-
For awhile now I have had the Atari 2600 and the Atari 7800. At my local swap meet I was able to finally get the 5200. I paid $50 for it, but the system was in the box and it came with an 2600 cartridge adapter also boxed and 29 atari 2600 games and 5 atari 5200 games. I may of paid a little bit to much for this but my feeling is that it may be years before I see another 5200 system in the wild again, especially boxed.I wouldn't call that to much at all for what you got. If everything was loose it might be worth a little less, but both main items boxed like that ups the value. Good deal.
-
-
"Why would Infogrames be interested in supporting old cartridges?"Just put a big notice on the box and a small one in the mould on the bottom: "We accept no responsibility for the use of old cartridges, at your own risk...blah blah"
If people phone in, it's like: "Did you read the warning, sir? Sorry, we don't handle old carts. Thank you. Bye bye, go back to playing the already installed games. Adios."
How long does that take to say
It's not how long it would take to say. It's how often it would have to be said, and what you'd all have to pay to have support staff to say it.
-
No, industry wise a production run is defined as the release of said product by the product's owner. When a company releases it's quarterly reports, they don't count clones.
The Gemini and TV-Boy are clones not produced by the original manufacturerer. Otherwise you could say the NES/Famicom has never left production since it was released in 1983, since there's all the pirate/clone systems out there and NES-On-A-Chips still being manufactured. -
Nice pics Curt! That is a teeny system! I like it! The stix look great and I'd have to guess they have the same feel as the originals? I especially love the Atari Logo on the top right corner of the stick! A very nice touch!Actually, they feel like the other JAKKs sticks. They feel like they use microswitches rather than dome switches.
They are kinda loose. They don't have the "bending plastic" resistance effect of the originals.
Still more than adequate.
Well actually, the originals (1977) used springs for all the contacts and had a looser feeling as well. These are more in line with those. The later ones (that most people are familiar with) used the plastic domes/ring.
-
The article's precisely objective. If you played Pong for the first time in 2004, you wouldn't think it was worth your time.I diagree, from first hand experience. Running the museum area at every Midwest Gaming Classic as well as at Jagfest 2K1, I've had the fortune to observe kids [ages 4 through 12, as well as teens] being introduced to pong for the first time (via the plethora of home pong consoles I have on display). All had a great time, and got in to playing it.
Sees where? Did you go to an arcade that still has a Pong and observe people saying it's not worth their time? Go to a show and see a neglected pong console with people saying it's not worth their time? I saw no mention of what your sources were for the article, other than your personal opinion. What you did (by your own admittance) was take Pong and compare and contrast it as a modern release and write down your thoughts on it from this perspective - "Yeah, I certainly remember what it meant at the time. But that fascination hasn't remained with me, since it was almost immediately overshadowed by what followed. It just blows my mind that people still play Pong today and act like it's fun." Statments like that, and "The thing is, die-hard classic gamers often play this game and act as though they ENJOY it." and "But we shouldn't go so far as to try and convince ourselves that Pong's actually FUN. I mean, that's taking it a bit far, don't you think? " are personal opinions, not facts. Objective = "Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices". Those are not objective statements. Hence, the article reads more like and Editorial Review than an Objective one.
He does not seek to guess what every potential reader might see.Which means you wrote your personal opinion. If you're not seeking to actually research and see what other people think, it's your opinion and thoughts. Nothing wrong with that, but don't promote it as being objective then.
-
I was looking at this picture on the ClassicGaming page and I was noticing how it was different from the box that Albert posted. Instead of Atari Climber they have Climber 5, they have Checkered Flag listed on the box, and Saboteur and Millipede pictured as well. The Pong pictured is just Video Olympics. I wonder how old this box they have pictured is?Yes, that was the production box just before E3. Climber 5 got a name change as did several other things. The shots of the box that Albert took are the latest. Other things might change as well by the time of the final production release.
-
Thanks for the pics Andy. Yes, there's lots of cool stuff in the works thanks to Curt.
Also, so people know - the units on display at E3 are special 10 game units without the special menu. Hence the spartan game listing in the one photo.
-
-
No, they were sold off a long time ago - that was Stern Electronics. The Stern now is Stern Pinball Inc., a legacy company created by Sam Stern's son, Gary Stern. The original Stern Electonics was from '76-'84. It was split up and Gary went on to restart the pinball under Data East Pinball in '86 after creating selling a business plan for it to Data East. He was hired as general manager. That was then sold to Sega and became Sega Pinball and then Gary went and bought Sega Pinball from Sega in '99 and renamed it Stern Pinball Inc. I've taken a tour of the place several times and met with everyone involved including Gary. Great guy. I did ask him point blank what ever happend happned to the Stern Electonics properties and who owns the video game rights. He honestly could not remember. My guess is his father Sam (who died in '86) had more to do with that.
-
I dont mean to be a nag but can someone educate me on how it came to be that the MSX and Coleco systems are so similar?I believe the CV led to the Spectravideo, and the Spectravideo led to the MSX. I am almost 100% sure about the Spectravideo/MSX part.
No, the CV was designed independantly of Spectravideo back in '81. Initially started by Coleco themselves and then handed off to a design firm in the midwest. In answer to Ferris' question, it's because (from what I was told by people at that firm) the CV was actually designed with a personal computer architecture in mind rather than a scaled down console architecture (similar to what Atari was originally going to do with the Atari 400 and later done properly with the XEGS). Hence the expansion bus, and "off the shelf" parts.
About the MS participation, I think it was just a marketing plot. The MSX was created by Mr Nishi from ASCII Corp. MSX users have found evidences that neither the MSX-Basic neither the MSX-DOS were programmed by MS itself. The only reason for using the MS name was cause ASCII was the MS representative in Japan back in the early 80s.Eduardo
Several Microsoft historical/profile books cover this, though I don't have any in front of me right now so I'll go by memory. MSX was the brainchild of Kay Kishi (head of Microsoft Japan - Kay's ASCII) in an effort to standardize the "older" 8 bit market in Asia and Europe as Microsoft proper moved on to the "16 bit" PC processor world. He worked with several other companies (mainly Spectravideo) to create an 8 bit "standard" hardware wise that also conviently included a MS Basic interface/dos. My own interpretation is that it was Kay's attempt at "playing Bill Gates" with the pacific rim market which (like Europe) was emerging with a plethora of 8 bit micros.
-
To Eduardo:I was just reading Ralph Baer's new book and he talks about the laser disc interface capability of the Colecovision and how he wishes someone one day would do something to explote this. Is adding some feature like this on to this new Colecovision a possiblity? Just curious. I would imagine that if you contacted Mr. Baer, he might be able to give you more info on this.
Allan
Well, the CV's graphic's chip (or VDP - Video Display Processor) the Texas Instruments TMS9928A is supposed to be able to handle an external video source and mix the signals for the final project using the input signal as background (such as take input from a laser disc and lay graphics over it).
Though TI's manual for the 9900 series leads me to believe that this feature was not available on the CV's chip since it states: The TMS9918A is pin-for-pin compatible with the TMS9928A/9929A, except for three pins, the composite video output, the external video input and the CPU clock output. These pins are replaced with the Black/White luminance and composite sync (Y) output and two difference pins, Blue (B-Y) and Red (R-Y) ouputs, respectively.
Of am I interpreting their statement wrong?
-
I'm surprised you didn't apply that reasoning to the guy who said this (which easily could be done):
You say they worked hard to bring this to us. They put a few roms that other people programmed years ago into a moulde. Big woop. I dunno, I just really don't see the need for all this hoopla when most of the people on here do indeed love the 2600 and like the real deal. I know I prefer that over this 40-in-1 thing.I think that passage plays the same way. Insulting people he doesn't know, and has no clue what sort of fans they are or passion they have, what care and work they've put in to this and is making sweeping statements before the game list or anything else has been released. Let alone hasn't even seen the console. These "people" took the time to develop and push for reproduction of actual 2600 hardware, which is what's under the hood. These "people" took the time to get new games. These "people" have been working with homebrewers and others to include their games. These "people" have been working their asses off to try and infuse some of the original Atari back in to the "new" one (which by the way, is a seperate entity from that "French" company. They have a stake in it but basicly leave it alone). It just pisses me off to no end when I see some of the statements that have been made by people in this thread. Don't want to buy it, fine. I've seen some good and fair reasons people have given for not wanting to. A good deal of the rest of them have been based on some ridiculous assertions though.
-
That's not a real photo, that's a mockup of the box (one of many that were done) that appears to have leaked.
.
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Supercharger and ipod?
in Atari 2600
Posted
Anyone tried this combo yet? Was given an iPod shuffle, and was going to load some of the game audio's up on that. Had already done it with a CD player, figured this should work just as well.