else

Exatron and Entrepo are/were the same company. In Video Games magazine, June 1983, page 49 it says that "Last February the Exatron Corporation changed its name to Entrepo (meaning "a storage place")". Note that the company is still around today (amazingly), and it's name is Exatron. So this mostly likely means that it changed it's name back or it never actually changed it's name after all. Maybe they have some prototype Super Game Modules lying around just collecting dust somewhere???

Coleco said publicly they were going to use the Exatron (aka Entrepo) Stringy Floppy. They were actually produced for other systems, and come up for sale on eBay occasionally. There's one for sale right now as a matter of fact: Exatron Stringy Floppy So just picture the unit in this auction in a different case, and you've got the Super Game Module....

That's why I explicitly said "COLECO" protos for the Colecovision. I was responding to the question about protos of games that were featured in the COLECO catalog. I'm aware that many protos made by other companies for the Colecovision have been found, but that wasn't the question (at least as I understood it). Most of the games you list fall in to this category. Wasn't aware that a Destruction Derby proto had been found -- has it been dumped? Still though, I think my answer was accurate -- like I said, I was probably was probably missing one or two from my list, but in general not much from COLECO has ever been found....

Really? Huh, I had no idea. I've played several .bins and never seen them. Yes, really. The Adam version clearly had the springboards on the 3rd screen. I played the heck out of it back in the day. Here's a YouTube video showing the game, springs and all.... Sounds to me like you're playing the Colecovision version. The Adam could play Colecovision games as well as Adam games, so you have make sure you're downloading the Adam version (not the Colecovision cart version).

Probably skipped to save ROM space or to meet a deadline. The Coleco Adam version has them.

Not much in the way of Coleco protos for the Colecovision have ever surfaced. There is a "Tunnels and Trolls" proto was found, but all it does is loop on the startup screeen -- it's not playable. "Video Hustler" is a proto that has been found -- it's a pool game. Cartridge-based versions of Super Donkey Kong and Super Donkey Kong Jr have been found -- these were used by Coleco to demo the Adam computer before it was ready. There's probably one or two that I'm missing, but in general that's about it. I don't think any of the games featured in the catalog (that I used to drool over -- especially that skiing game) have ever been found.... The lack of protos makes me think that Coleco didn't have much in the pipe for the Colecovision at the time it died; that they had moved almost all of their focus to the Adam at the end....

This was not really true, although the media had the executives at Atari, Mattel, and Coleco convinced that it was. So all three companies rushed headlong in the the computer market, and all ended up committing suicide (well, not Mattel, but they left the electronics market for a LONG time after that). Then Nintendo came along and found (to their surprise and happiness) that they had the market more-or-less all to themselves!

Other people have proposed the same thing in the past. Latency is the big problem. Since nobody knows how much the games will tolerate, you could end up putting in a big amount of time and effort -- only to reach the finish line and find out there's no way it will work. It's a chicken and egg problem.....

Just wanted to chime in with the praise for Space War 2000. No Jaguar library is complete without it -- it's really quite good! All it needed was a little bit of polishing and it would have been ready to go....

I don't know that those are necessarily protos. Somebody else can confirm, but I believe Coleco used EPROMs in many of their production games....

They are for the Atari 2600. Definitely not for the ADAM.

All depends on how you define success..... Nukey Shay's opinion (shared with some others here) is that it was a success because it sold a lot of copies (generated a lot of immediate $$$). And sure, that's one valid way of defining success. But counting the immediate $$$ the game generated is only one way of measuring success.... If you take a broader look and define success as "did it raise the perception of Atari in peoples minds, ensuring a lot of future revenue, and thus ensuring the long term future of the 2600 and Atari", then the answer is no, it wasn't a success. In fact, it was a spectacular failure. It's a lot like Wallstreet does, putting short term profits ahead of long term ones. You can measure success either in the short term, or the long term. And the answer depends on which you choose.....

The game is huge, but there's no way to save your progress!!! Did they really expect somebody to play this game for days and days and never turn their Lynx off or run out of batteries? Don't know what they were thinking.....

I have a reasonably good boxed Sears collection. I'm aware that there were two numbering schemes: 6-998XX (1st scheme: Sporting Goods department) 49-751XX (2nd scheme: Electronics department) However, I have a couple of oddball boxes that don't fit in to either of these numbering schemes: 49-75601 Outer Space 49-75602 Blackjack Anybody know what the story is with these? Were they some kind of mistake, or perhaps they got caught in the middle of the transition from the 1st to the 2nd (but before the 2nd scheme had been finalized)? Unfortunately you can't just assume that the "6" was supposed to be a "1", because there are other titles that already have those numbers....

So on these the game was a game and not just a controlled movie? Yup! Not true. Some screens are controlled movies (just like the arcade) where you have to hit left/right/up/down at exactly the right time. Other screens were more interactive, like a traditional game is. It's a mixed bag -- probably about 50% of each.

The Sears boxes are the best looking of all as well. The black with colored text looks really slick when they are all lined up on a shelf....

By the way, the worst thing about the Driving Controller is the foot pedal. It's just a simple on / off switch. So you really have no speed control to speak of -- you're either accelerating or decelerating, and there's no way to hold your speed at some point in between. Now, I never caught on to this when I was a kid, and I'm guessing probably most kids didn't. But now that I'm older, I do find it disappointing....

That's mostly it. And neither Destructor or Dukes are very good. Neither even begins to hold a candle to Turbo. Destructor has a few fans, but honestly it's more of a lame and buggy demo than a "game". Just stay on the "starcruisors" ramp (where you're safe from the baddies) and rack up unlimited points. Seriously -- did Coleco even playtest this thing? (Actually, there's an interview from a former Coleco programmer who says they basically shoved it out the door before it was done) Dukes is quite a bit better than Destructor, but still nothing all that good. Pulling off a successful turn is all but impossible. Turning really doesn't matter anyway, because the 3D effect is all an illusion. The police are always behind you, the blue care is always in front of you -- no matter which way you turn (how's that for a mind twister -- makes me dizzy just thinking about it). Still, the potential was there for a really great game. Too bad they didn't tweak the game just a bit more -- it could have been great.

All Coleco's assets weren't sold to Hasbro. Adam's House (which has since changed it's name to eColeco), purchased all the remaining Adam inventory from Coleco. From eColeco's web site: You may also want to add that River West Brands seems to have seems to no longer be doing anything with the Coleco name (as far as I can tell). Their web site hasn't been updated for a couple of years, and I no longer see any Coleco branded toys in stores....

Where: L = low channel (aka 2), H = high channel (aka 3)

Well, I thought it was more like asking why the Atari 400/800/XL series the Apple II/II+/IIe/IIc series didn't need separate versions for their different models -- two manufacturers I am more familiar with. Like I said, I know next to nothing about the Commodore line. I guess Commodore didn't worry so much about backwards compatibility as other companies did.

Cool, thanks! Wonder why they didn't do more to make the two machines compatible with each other? Ah well, that's all ancient history I guess......

Okay, I'll admit I know very little about the Commodore line of computers. But why did Atarisoft publish separate versions off all their games -- one version for the VIC20 and another for the C64? I generally assumed the two machines were mostly compatible with each other (one just had more memory). Is this not the case?

Okay. Well, that's the only semi-obvious thing I can think of.....

This can be caused by a faulty / worn-out controller. Try unplugging both controllers and then turning it on with a cart plugged in. Yes, unplugging the controllers requires you to open up the case (except in the unlikely event you have the Sears model).