PlaysWithWolves

Um, okay JT.

It's flashback Friday! "Same trusted logo." Same trusted battery-in-the-box 1.0: Same trusted streaming: Same trusted outright lie:

What really happened with Chesnais and Wyatt: https://dilbert.com/strip/2019-10-24

I guess it really depends upon how strictly one adheres to the 2600's abilities. Too strict and we may as well be playing on original hardware. Too loose, and it may as well be considered an 8-bit aesthetic.

The boxes were just teasers leading up to the Ataribox design reveal two weeks later. These were the CGI boxes holding the CGI consoles.

Forgive me if I'm misreading, but I don't think that's necessarily within the realms of this exercise. That sounds more like you're describing games that could be playable on actual VCS hardware. The Minotaur Project (which I never heard of before this thread) seems like a great example of what @Electrk meant. It's a modern game with modern ideas but has the 2600 aesthetic. Sure, it would be impossible to do on real VCS hardware but has the look-and-feel but that wasn't their goal. Each sprite looks like something that could pop out of any given 2600 game, be it from title screen or gameplay. Or are you thinking it should be games that might be 90% playable on real hardware but allow that extra 10% for a little performance-related breathing room?

More cannibalistic behavior from superfans. MatMax VR is a more-than-$300 AVCS supporter in the IGG campaign, but Lucas ain't havin' no dissent:

It's been a week since DesTechAZ and still no Atari news. But can we call these taco salads? I really want these to be taco salads (unedited photo):

I've started work on the Tacobox OS code, now in early access. It's not unfinished. It is the current state of the software which we will continue to refine and finesse up until launch, and as with any game system, beyond. Now throw money at me so I can continue work.

I'm confused: Are they doing too many updates (the first sentence) or not enough (the latter)? FWIW, Indiegogo requires frequent updates of "at least once a month". They really don't (or shouldn't) have a choice. At least you went in with eyes-wide-open about the risk.

You're the "Pepperidge Farm remembers" guy? Cool!

Yeah, it's hard for me to define. To me, the first prototype would be the very first that's actually inside the console shell. That'd make this one the first prototype--which we've yet to see even working. The second prototype would hopefully iron out the problems of the first. Atari may consider the first development board to be the first prototype--or even the first laptop/pc they used before they called it "for illustration purposes only". By that standard, we may be on the third or fourth prototype -- 1: Laptop/PC, 2: Garage dev. board, 3: Black box GDC (if different from #2), 4: Current prototype They probably think this is true, because while @Flojomojo put the "You Are Here" arrow that image comes from their IGG campaign. And, the step immediately above it is "pre-order campaign", so they went in thinking (or pretending) they had a prototype. I dunno. In-as-much fun and enlightening this thread has been, I've been wondering if it's worth continuing to post. I'm not sure if any minds have been changed from us, or if it's just people facing the stark reality of Atari's failings. I saw another AA thread where one intrepid poster from this thread laid out perfectly why that person won't support current Atari. The response? The same ol' shtick that all consoles go through developmental ups and downs ; that the difference is we're witnessing it because of Atari's transparency. The frustrating part is I'm pretty sure that same user has been explained that the problem is that Atari crowdfunded this instead of funding it by normal means. Of course, the ol' "lead a horse to water" idiom applies.

I apologize to everyone in this thread and am prepared for @CPUWIZ's fair and just punishment. .

I just thought the Ooya link was an interesting connection. Wouldn't surprise me if they were already working through them as the Chinese factory liaison. Any ideas why they apparently dropped Flextronics (now Flex, Inc.)? AFAIK they do the same thing as SurfaceInk. It was listed as the manufacturer in their 04/2018 disclosure PDF. Of course, they quickly became three million dollars richer after that, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

That 2012 entry, though:

Shot: Chaser:

About cheating: I think you're right. Here's an example of that very thing from his page: So, he's gaming the system--so to speak. While everyone else is using their middle finger (in his example), he wants to use his forefinger--because it's better. Then somehow it's okay because it's not done by programming code? I think there's a fair argument to be made for left-handed controllers, with some 10-12% of the population being soulless lefties. But custom controllers with button remapping seems a bit sketchier; at least if betting real money. I think he may subconsciously know this with the crazy amount of specificity he offers. It's almost like he's over-justifying his decisions. Of course, this is an opinion and not an accusation. @tripletopper, if you really want a custom controller then I'd suggest greatly simplifying the project. Or maybe just do a Google search and buy something like this for £25 + shipping: But we're all mostly interested in your current controllers.

Shortly after the Register article, I posted a link saying Tin Giant had four employees. This may be the same one: http://www.buzzfile.com/business/Tin-Giant-LLC-720-310-5051 I figure the four are Rob, his SO, his yoga instructor, and an unpaid programmer intern.

Reported for hate speech.

The sandwich below was prominently featured on Tin Giant's website since before Wyatt became the Atari Architect:

Hey, you win some and you lose some. But, I did apologize. He chose not to accept. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Anyway, I'm sincerely glad he made it, that he got to display his demo, and maybe make some buddies along the way. Bonus points if he and Al make up, since it'd be in person.

It's a Dodge Dart because it's a Dodge Dart. It's not a "Dart Amico"(i.e., model Amico made by indy manufacturer Dart, inc.). You're right that it's a pedantic argument. @mr_me is right that it's not technically an updated Intellivision model, even if it essentially is. @Tommy Tallarico is right that the genealogy is there. I'm right that you'll have your work cut out for you, public-perception wise. Well, I may or may not be right on any of that but I'll pretend I am. 😎

There's nothing wrong with asking people to try your game at a convention (of course). And is even a good idea, presuming it's as good as you feel. I would suggest attacking a reviewer does nothing to help your cause, though. It may even drive more people to check out @Andrew Rosa's review.

Thanks. It just looked like more dust to me in that picture.

The dust is there to distract you from realizing there's no cartridge in the slot. My apologies. I'm told there's a Skunboard there.