spacecadet

Oh man, Rugrats, Cats, Elf Bowling 1 *and* 2, and 7 Barbie games! Most of this ad was "eh", but the game selection was some on-the-nose parody.

Every single generic PS2 memory card I bought back in the day is a (not very good) paperweight right now. They all failed. New ones? I imagine they're probably something like a micro-SD card with an internal adapter. I'd love to see one ripped open. If that's the case, they could still be super unreliable, but there may be a way to save the data on one if it ever does go bad. (Or just swap cards.)

Is it weird that whenever I watch something like The Walking Dead, all I can think is "man, the first thing I'd be doing after the zombie apocalypse would be raiding the homes of all the biggest known video game collectors out there"? I mean, there are still gas-powered generators...

I think the flex circuit is probably your main or only problem anyway. The problem with the buttons is typical of that. You can get the gold circuits and they should last a bit longer. I just got the standard ones for mine, which I'm sure will go bad eventually again but they are literally $2.25 to replace and it takes five minutes once you've done it once.

Whoops, my mistake. I forgot what year it is PS2 and PS3 have backward compatibility, not PS4. Doesn't change my point, though.

In fact, *every* subsequent PlayStation is backward compatible with the PS1. I've never really been on the hype train with these "classic mini" consoles. The only one I think is somewhat interesting is the Neo Geo one, because it's different. But I haven't actually plunked the money down for that either. Different strokes for different folks, but I don't really understand the rationale of buying a somewhat smaller version of a console you probably already have, to play the same games. I guess this thing just isn't for me. I already have a bunch of systems that can play PS1 games, and I have all the PS1 games I want.

I don't think I've ever intentionally bought a special edition - the extras just never seem worth it. Like, here's an action figure that would cost $20 if you bought it separately, and we're going to charge $40 extra for it as part of the SE. Some people buy SE's as an investment, thinking they'll be worth more later if they ever re-sell the game, but that almost never happens in my experience. Usually SE's depreciate *more* than the regular edition of the game. They may still be worth a little more in absolute terms, but they've lost more of their original value. The most extreme example of this that I can think of is the Halo SE from the original Xbox, which is actually worth *less* than the non-SE. (The non-SE is less common.) I do have a few SE's that I bought secondhand because, as mentioned, they often go for not much more than the regular version, or sometimes they're even all that's available. I don't have any really cool ones, though, which is another thing that turns me off from buying new ones. The ones I have are just like, a book or soundtrack or something with the game in a slightly nicer slip case or bigger box. I've been in the market for Puyo Puyo Tetris on Switch recently (it's not an expensive game, but I already have it on PS Vita so I'm trying to get it as cheap as possible), and I keep almost buying the SE because it's only like $5 more whenever I see it. But all it has are a couple of keychains and a cardboard box. Probably really worth about $5. I go to Japan once or twice a year and some of my SE's are from there - they are SE-crazy. *Every* freakin' game seems to be available as an SE. So about half the SE's I do have came from there. The one thing I do like about their SE's is that they usually come in that *really* thick, glossy cardboard, with really nice outer artwork, which US SE's don't seem to. For me, that's actually worth paying a little extra for, even moreso than the extras you might get inside. But I still probably wouldn't pay the extra cost for most games packaged like that when new.

The ColecoVision almost definitely has a corroded power switch. Just try cleaning it with some Deoxit. That might fix the picture problem by itself. It also might not, but 99% of these systems have that problem and it causes picture issues like that, so yours most likely has *at least* that, but there's a good chance that's all it is. I assume you have a standard RF cable that'll work with any of these systems for now. You'll probably also need some kind of adapter on the TV end if you don't have one, be it a switchbox or just a basic RF to coax adapter. Your current TV might even work - see if it has a coaxial input. (I admit I don't really know about TV standards in Australia, so I'm just assuming there was coax there at some point and may still be, because I don't think these consoles could have used anything else back then.) All of my modern TV's still have coax input. Troubleshooting and repair tools probably depend on what skills you have and how deep you want to go into it. For me, when it comes to stuff like replacing soldered-on chips, unless a system's rare, I'd probably just replace the whole system instead. You usually need a parts donor anyway, so you're destroying one system to save another. May as well just buy another working system and keep the broken one as a future parts donor for something else; it's the same thing and it's easier. But otherwise, for basic repairs like cleaning the CV power switch or other light jobs, you just need a good Philips screwdriver, some Deoxit, some 91% alcohol, a can of compressed air, maybe a multimeter to check continuity, maybe a soldering iron and supplies if there's anything you see that's obvious (sometimes solder joints just fail over the years, and you can just resolder them). I don't think any of these systems require any proprietary tools, and they're all pretty easy to open and work on.

It doesn't surprise me. Other people probably know the technical ins and outs more than me but I sold electronics in the VCR era and it was actually a selling point if one model had better picture quality with cable (coax) sources than another. Any little thing to differentiate, they would do it if it was a bullet point on a sales sheet. So all VCR's had at least passable RF demodulators because they were all trying to compete based on having decent picture quality. Nowadays I'll bet the RF demodulators in an LCD that actually has such a thing is probably *just* barely good enough to even do the job. Nobody buys an LCD screen based on that, so I doubt the manufacturers care. The bullet point is no longer "best cable TV picture in its class - more than 350 lines of resolution!", it's literally just "has RF input". People who need it know it's there. But nobody's evaluating different RF quality between brands or models of LCD screen. I still use my old JVC HR-S7500 for old game consoles too.

Voted none of the above. They've all aged poorly. If you put a gun to my head I'd probably pick either the OG GameBoy, because of its game selection and its really advanced sound chip (and not even "for a handheld"), or the Game Gear for its Master System compatibility. But I don't really find any of them to be pleasurable to use. Interesting from a historical perspective, sure. But I didn't like any of those handhelds at the time and I still don't. (And I own all of them, so I'm not speaking out my ass.) They all have pretty glaring problems that none of them except the GB were able to overcome in the eyes of market, and those problems haven't magically gone away over the years. They've actually just become more obvious, by virtue of them being solved in various later handhelds. I had a GameBoy when it first came out (and didn't like it) and I kept upgrading it whenever new models would come out because some of the games were good and I kept hoping newer versions of the system itself would finally fix its various annoyances. I bought all the other handheld systems at various different times, some when they were current and others later. But the first handheld I remember really genuinely liking was the Neo Geo Pocket Color. There was nothing about it that I'd change other than the lack of backlight. This bothers me a lot more now, but I remember at the time using it mostly on subway rides that were brightly lit, so it didn't bother me back then. And at the time, the choice seemed to be washed out, blurry backlightining (like on the GG or Lynx) or a tack sharp, fast screen with no backlighting, so a person could reasonably prefer a non-backlit screen. Handhelds are different than game consoles in that it's not just that graphics got better. Early game consoles aren't really any less *usable* than modern ones. But handhelds started out with a set of limitations and annoyances that were iterated out over time until we got where we are now, where we finally have handheld systems that work as well as they should. Controls, form factor, system size, comfort, screen quality and size, battery life and type, etc. all improved over the years, and increasing market demand for them reflects that. But those early systems were yecccch! Always were, still are.

Well, people have been saying this for more than 20 years already, so obviously longer than that. I think some of you guys just need to accept that the world has changed. The days when you could get an Atari 800XL for 5 bucks were before Ebay existed. There's now a global marketplace for any individual item. That is a sea change. People used to need to actively seek out someone locally who was actually interested in something that was, at the time, just considered outdated and obsolete garbage. Now they just put a listing up and they have a built-in audience coming to *them* from all over the world for "classic" and "retro" stuff. And that audience is growing all the time - even Ebay used to be a lot smaller than it is now. (I remember buying my old Sears heavy sixer, in the box, on Ebay for $13. But that was in 1998, when most people weren't even on the *internet* yet, much less Ebay. And you still had to pay for stuff by physically mailing a money order to the seller.) Combine that with the fact that nobody's making more of this stuff, most of it's already changed hands from those who don't want it to those who do, and some of it's still breaking irreparably every year (even I dropped my Atari 5200 on the floor and shattered the two clear panels on it), and supply isn't what it once was either. Saying "the people who pay these prices are to blame!" is a little strange too... that's just supply and demand. The value of an item is the price you're able to sell it for. I may remember the days when a box of cereal cost 99 cents, but that doesn't mean a box of cereal is still worth 99 cents today or that I'm going to be able to walk into a grocery store with 99 cents and walk out with a box of cereal. Plenty of people are willing to pay $5 for a box of cereal, so that's what the manufacturers and stores price it at. My desire to pay less doesn't mean anything to anyone; it's irrelevant. This is one of the oldest discussions on this site, and it comes up every few months. I always get sucked in to commenting on it even though it's the same thing over and over, and has been for as long as I've been here. (Which is a long time.) But I do see at least a few more people starting to accept reality, so hopefully it's beginning to sink in.

The crash.

There's a great future in plastics. Think about it.

I bought a Japanese system at launch, and I lined up for an American system at launch. I still have my original Japanese system, although my American one died and I had to replace it. The Japanese system's boxed up now (ever since people figured out the boot disc trick) but the US one's actually still hooked up. I've rarely been as excited for the launch of a game system; maybe never, actually. It was the height of my console fandom and I was just totally caught up in the hype. And for once, it lived up to it IMO. It was everything I wanted in a game console, as someone who had grown up in the arcades but *also* had done the whole PS1 thing and gotten used to fancy 3D graphics and RPG's and whatnot. And I missed out on the Saturn, so I was itching to "catch up" with what Sega was up to, and I wasn't disappointed. Obviously other people were, but I still love the system. It's one of my all-time favorites. It might be the system I'd take with me to a desert island, if you asked me that question. I got a PS2 at launch as well (actually a Japanese and US one too) and I remember my first reaction to it was "what the hell is this piece of shit?" I had ambitions to work in the industry by that time, though, so I thought I had to have it. The PS2 took a long time to grow on me. The Dreamcast had me from day one.

I actually didn't know PSVR could even do this so I'm quite curious about it now. One thing is that with a 3D BD, with passive 3D glasses you're getting half resolution to begin with on the TV, and most people used passive TV's. My Panasonic plasma is active (I say "is" but it's my bedroom TV now, so I never really get to watch 3D anymore) so I would see the full 1080p image, but somehow it always *looked* softer than regular 1080p, and also a lot dimmer. So I have a feeling the PSVR image will be six of one, half a dozen of the other. Definitely going to try it out tomorrow, though. I have a bunch of 3D Blu-Rays and I love the format. I was really disappointed when there wasn't a single new 3D 4K TV that I could buy at the time of my last upgrade. Of course I knew that meant there wouldn't be a whole lot of new 3D BD releases in the future either, but there were/are still quite a few past releases I'd pick up if I had a way to watch them in my living room.

I don't really get the point of the thread, which seems to be "if these things changed, then these *other* things would need to change, which they couldn't!" That's nonsensical. If we're already talking about a purely hypothetical situation in which things were different, then you can't start with the premise that some things are within limits and others aren't. It's like saying if evolution had gone differently, sure there could have been dragons. But unicorns?! What are you, high?! Things happened in the way they did. We can't go back and change them, and we can't know what would have happened if something had. We can debate what we think would have happened had things gone a slightly different way, but in that debate, you can't say some things changing are possible while others aren't just because the latter wouldn't support your argument. I think you're also vastly underestimating the importance of the Japanese market at that time, and the long tail that it created for the PS1. FF7 may have only sold 3 million in the US, but the 10.9 million it sold worldwide sold a lot of systems, which in turn attracted a lot of developers in every territory. And those developers made other games in that same style, which is how the system became well known for RPG's. And while none of those may have broken 10 million on their own, collectively they probably sold 100 million copies and about half as many systems. And that's just one genre. Also, I know where you're getting your sales figures from, and at least some of them are wrong. Maybe not all of them are, but I know firsthand that at least several of them are because I worked at one of the publishers on that list and we had surpassed the numbers there for a couple of those games within the first year of release. Those numbers are not ever made public, so wherever The Magic Box is getting them from has to be piecemeal info from whenever the publisher last released it, if ever. Or it's just estimates. But domestic US sales numbers are proprietary info, so at best a good portion of that list was either woefully out of date even when it was posted, or worse, it was just made up. Japanese sales numbers are different; they're public. But US sales numbers, at least from that era (maybe it's changed *now*, I dunno) are proprietary. So take any list like that with a grain of salt.

It was pretty common BITD to have a "system on a card" that could make one system run another's programs, by actually providing that system's CPU and memory subsystem and then just using the I/O of the host system. Most systems back then used off the shelf parts, so it was pretty easy to do, and cheaper than buying a whole second system which would include the case, system bus and I/O. Apple even did it themselves for their own system when they made the IIe card for Mac. Apparently the Cordata WPC Bridge computer posted above used an actual Trackstar card for IIe compatibility. This was in 1988, so those components wouldn't have been too expensive by then.

I don't disagree but I didn't choose that option in part because I actually don't think most consoles with a large enough library have appreciable differences in the quality of those libraries. I think you get more variation with very small libraries because of the very small sample size, in the same way two baseball players might be hitting .200 and .800, respectively, after just 10 at bats, but both are probably going to hit around .270 after 500 at bats. So I think systems with larger libraries pretty much always have a larger total number of good games vs. systems with small, but supposedly higher quality libraries. I'd always rather have the larger library. (This is especially true because a lot of games considered "bad" really aren't, they're just not games that appeal to a broad swath of people. But some of them might be hidden gems to any given person, and you'd miss out on those with a smaller library.)

I went with 31-50 as kind of a hedge, but I don't know what systems actually have a library of exactly that size, if any... I feel like if a console is a major release from a major manufacturer, even 51-100 is a tiny library. But I know there are systems out there with as few as four games. (My first console, the Coleco Telstar Arcade, was one of those.) Generally, though, those were systems that either weren't really intended to have a lot of interchangeable games, or they were just from small manufacturers who really didn't have a lot of hope in the market. But any big, mass market system with under 100 games, especially in the post-crash era, is kind of an embarrassment for the manufacturer.

Guess I'm unlucky then - I seem to own two of those four (Zelda and Bayonetta 1&2)

I wasn't replying just to you but to the general sentiment in this thread, which surprised me. This is AtariAge, and this is the Atari 2600 forum. You'd think there would be someone who knows about this stuff here. I guess I am that person in this thread, even though I'm an Intellivision guy myself. There's a first for everything, I guess... Anyway, those things you list are literally what make it different from other Atari 2600's. These may not be important things to you, but they are different from a standard 2600. That means they're probably going to be important to *somebody*. You couldn't have walked in to a store in the 70's or 80's and bought one of these. And that's fine. But there are people (again, obviously not *you*, but some people) willing to pay somewhat of a premium for these differences. This is not a common 2600. I'm not saying it's a unicorn, but it's uncommon, especially boxed and complete. It's worth a bit more than a regular boxed and complete 2600. You may not be willing to pay more, but others have. And again, this is not a new thing that nobody's seen before. These come up every now and then. Not dozens of times per year, but maybe once a year. People who have been around a while generally have seen them, and know they're uncommon in this condition. That's what's surprising to me about this thread. Most of the people commenting have thousands of posts, yet they're acting like they have no idea what this even is. In all seriousness, I thought people were just messing with the OP. I guess maybe it's a commentary on where this hobby is, that even on AtariAge, in the Atari 2600 forum, most people don't seem to know about one of the more "common" uncommon Atari 2600 variants.

I dunno. I'm going by what Sony says about it in their FAQ here: https://blog.us.playstation.com/2017/10/02/playstation-vr-the-ultimate-faq/ Q: Do I need new headphones to experience 3D audio? No, any wired stereo headphones or wired earbuds can support 3D audio. Stereo headphones are included with PS VR, but you can also use your preferred audio headsets if they feature a standard 3.5mm male connector. The processor box is responsible for 3D audio. But it only works with wired headphones because of lag and bandwidth limitations with wireless headphones.

I can't tell if people are being facetious or not about asking what "factory reconditioned" means in this context. These are pretty well known and have been discussed here many times. Many examples: https://www.google.com/search?q=factory+reconditioned+2600+site%3Aatariage.com They're pretty uncommon, and go for a bit of a premium over standard boxed systems - here's a recent sale (the only one on Ebay): https://www.ebay.com/itm/Atari-2600-original-factory-reconditioned-25-games-controllers-and-more/113166842198?hash=item1a5944f956:g:7XYAAOSwK8BbMurW The chrome covered switches are standard to all factory reconditioned units. That's one way to tell a recon'd unit from a non-recon'd unit. I have one of these myself that came from a guy who actually worked at Warner when they owned Atari, but unfortunately mine's loose, unboxed. Unboxed ones probably aren't worth much; this is a collector thing, so people who buy them probably really want them complete.

You're assuming that, as Bethesda is. I've sold several games on Ebay that I included the receipt with for just this reason. It's not Bethesda's job to police this before the fact. Do you not think there's a reason that companies don't do this as a matter of course? That it's news this time? Is Bethesda the only developer with a competent legal team, or is it more likely that they're the only one with the opposite? And no, I am not a lawyer, but does their reasoning even make sense to you? If someone's selling a NIB Atari 2600 on Ebay, does that imply to you that it comes with a valid manufacturer warranty from 1978 just because it's listed as "new"? Yet that's the logical extension of their argument. I have a feeling Bethesda would get laughed out of court on this one. But they're counting on it never coming to that over a $30 sale of a video game.

PSVR audio is always 3D, regardless of what headphones you have. Wireless headphones aren't supported because of lag and bandwidth. 3D audio is really important for VR because as you're moving your head around, the sound needs to move with whatever you're looking at. So Sony made the decision not to support wireless headphones.