G.Whiz

Plus, you always knew right off the bat who was going to be killed that episode. ("If you're wearing red, you're dead...) ~G

If you look at images 20-25, it appears that it was used to get in and out of the map room. I have never gotten very far in this game, so I'm not sure how you do it in the normal game... Why leave it out? To save k for some other feature? Also, is this perhaps why you can never get to the top of the Ark, because you never use the key? (i.e. the key was taken out of game play, but it still was programmed to trigger the "points" needed to reach the Ark at the end of the game). Lastly, these look much more like actual screen shots than the usual artist's impressions. Has someone hacked this, added the key back in, and then taken the screen shots along the way using an emulator and a PC screen shot program? I don't think they could have done something like this back in the day, but perhaps they could recreate each screen graphically on a computer and save it as a picture file? Doesn't make much sense -- they never did it for any other games, so why this one? Very confusing, but raises a lot of interesting questions! ~G

I've got a dragon on my back -- it's a dragon attack from Adventure. (I can make it quack when I flex my shoulders.) And, of course, a "Freddie Mercury Lives" tat on my upper arm. ~G

I agree with most of this. Back then, people used to get their *toasters* fixed if they broke, rather than chucking it and getting a new one at Wal*Mart. And for the sheer fact that this was literally a revolutionary product, there was not much previous data to predict a life-cycle. In fact, as I have always argued, I don't think that there was much of a "plan" at all. Part of that is management's fault, though most of it is simply because this sort of thing had never been done before. If you look at the life-cycle of coin-ops during that time, there is a definite progression in the hardware, obviously done to support the growing complexity of games. In a relatively short time, the industry went from Pong to Defender and beyond. But the 2600 remained the same. Why? Because it was still selling. Eight years down the road, you couldn't expect the arcades to be packed with people waiting to play Pong for the millionth time. But with the Atari, you could put together new and progressively better software using the same hardware. Then came the crash, and the move to computers. Still even here the graphics and sound were not much to write home about when you had cutting edge machines like Space Ace. Can you imagine a system that used a standard coin-op setup for home videogame hardware? You would play real PacMan, real Defender, real Joust... not lousy ports that had to "make do" with the system. I know that a lot of stuff went into those coin-ops, but would it really have been that cost prohibitive? Anyway, I think the plan was just to ride that baby as long as possible, then move onto the next thing that came up. I don't think that the 5200, the 7800, or any of the computers were up to the task which is part of why Atari slowly slid away... ~G

Space Invaders was the first, Asteroids we rolled over within a couple of days. I can't remember for sure, but I think I may have rolled Breakout too -- is this possible? Vague recollection of it, but I could be wrong... Does Adventure count? I've completed that on all three levels... ~G

I don't know if there was a "played most" cartridge. We had it right from the beginning, so it was Combat and Air/Sea Battle, then Video Olympics, then Space Invaders -- played that one constantly when we first got it. I remember we got it on a trip to the "big city" and my Mom wouldn't let me play it when we got back from the trip because it was too late at night. My Dad convinced her to let me have a couple of go's at it before bed -- I figured out years later that it was probably because he wanted to play it too, but he would never do that until after I had opened and played it first. I remember hearing him play for quite a while that night after I went to bed... After that, my friends started to get Ataris, so we would all get different games and then get together to have game marathons, one cartridge after another, collecting points for each one we beat everyone else on. Missile Command, Asteroids, Night Driver, Starmaster, Outlaw, etc. One of the "burn fast, burn bright" cartridges was Riddle of the Sphinx. Played that intensely for a day or two until we figured out the "secret" -- unlike Adventure, it wasn't very playable once you had solved it... ~G

Must have been a long (but fun) winter... ~G In the Uk winters are always long. You often mistake summers for them Not as long as most places in Canada. But I spent a week in early January in London back in '95 -- about zero, cold slush everywhere, and damp that still hasn't left me. I'll take -20 here over that any day! Most of my trips to England though have been beautiful and almost rain-free. They always talk about the rain there, but except for that deep-winter trip, I've always had great weather. 'Course when I worked in Surrey later that year for two months, everyone complained that it was too hot... I guess you can never win! ~G

Must have been a long (but fun) winter... ~G

I stand corrected... I couldn't actually find the reference, but all this time I thought that the issue with the hottie in the jeans playing Centipede on the cover was the first Electronic Games (it's actually number three...) Wow, it really is true what they say, you learn something new every day! (Just learned that yesterday...) ~G

Yes, that was the book. I did some research, and found out it was called "How to Master Home Video Games" by Tom Hirschfield. There's a bit of information here: http://www.steverd.com/whatbook/masthome.htm I don't remember seeing it in Electronic Games either, and I always read it from cover to cover -- still have at least that first issue somewhere, and probably others. That book was definitely the first mention of it I'd ever seen. ~G

Actually, a "mindlink" is already in the testing phase -- though not for playing games. A company called Cyberkinetics is developing a system to help quadriplegics regain some control over their environment. A small microchip, about the size of an aspirin, is implanted in their brain. This captures the brainwave and transmits the signal to a computer. For example, he or she could move the mouse pointer literally just by thinking about it. Once this phase is up and running, the company hopes to adapt the system and develop computerized limbs. The system would by-pass the damaged spinal cord and operate the limbs exactly the same way as anyone else would, except that the brainwaves are transmitted through the air, not through the spinal cord. Kind of cool stuff -- you can check it out here: http://www.cyberkineticsinc.com/content/me...s/braingate.jsp Might be a while before the gaming market jumps onto this technology, what with the brain surgery involved, etc. Of course PlayStation would be the first, releasing the PSi (or would that be the PSi Fi?) ~G

Perhaps this has been discussed before, but I'm wondering how everyone here first heard about the Adventure easter egg. For me, it was from a little (blue?) book on how to master Atari games -- can't remember what it was called, though I think "master" was in the title. In the Adventure section, it described the steps to getting the magic dot, lining up the items, etc. I didn't have Adventure at the time, but we knew someone who did so we borrowed it and tried it out. Finding that secret room was one of my best Atari memories ever. Funny thing was, we always wondered what that black vertical bar was for... Anyone know how the story got out? Anyone find it on their own? ~G

Hmm. I think the question was "most accurate". I don't think anyone is saying that 2600 Space Invaders is a replica coin-op Space Invaders. Or Missle Command. Or Defender. In fact, I think that most agree that it would be impossible to duplicate any of these on the 2600 -- even for programmers now with three decades of tricks up their sleeves. Now, for one who has seen this thread "a thousand times" (and obviously not happy about it) it's interesting that you choose to keep reading this thread, and better yet, replying to it. I've only seen this thread once, but I got from your first post that you did not think this a worthy topic. Your second post underlined that fact. In your third post, you were screaming from the rooftops that we should all just stop talking about it, since none but the early ports are even worthy of discussion. I love the fact that you like discussing the fact that we shouldn't be discussing this... I stand by my picks. And BTW, I personally think Asteroids was one of the biggest let downs of all time. Perhaps you think that the "lurking for saucer" strategy is the making of a good port, but not so in my books. For me, it is the vector graphics, the sounds, the feeling of that little ship whipping up and down the screen. That ship was just too big! Next to Pac Man, I think that it is the worst port that I've played. But you know what? I respect the fact that many people here like it and enjoy it. In fact I think that's great, that's the whole point in the first place -- have fun playing games. So here's what: you play Asteroids, I'll play Missle Command, and we'll all be happy. ~G

I always thought that Venture was a pretty good port. I wasn't particularly happy to see that there were only 2 (?) levels, but the actual game play was fairly close. Space Invaders would be another one. Yes, the playfield is different, but you have all the elements: shields, marching invaders left to right, UFO, speeding up as number of invaders decreases, etc. For "game feel", I think this one is pretty close. Same too of Missle Command. I know some who actually like it better because it uses the joystick and they never could get the right hang of that trackball... ~G

Yes, but it was well-made crap... Of course, this question is purely subjective, but the criteria that I would use is: number of good games, percentage of good games, number of innovations, and overall impact. Imagic had some good games (Demon Attack, Atlantis) but they were not all that innovative -- certainly their box design left much to be desired. Activision gave us Kaboom!, Pitfall series, River Raid series, Chopper Command, H.E.R.O., and Starmaster (off the top of my head) that were all fresh and innovative. The graphics were incredible for their time (the famous sunset), Dolphin was the first game to incorporate sound as a major gameplay component, the inventiveness with many of their games easily outstripped the competition at the time, and I believe they were also one of the few third-party to use the paddle controls. Even the "crap" games, you could tell that the programmers really cared about what they were doing instead of "getting product to market" as with the Big A. Not only that, but I think Activision laid the groundwork for third-party software makers to come. And, of course, they were the first company to treat their programmers like rock stars, the gods and idols that they were. ~G

Maybe at some point in your communications program (Is phony degree! Lugash learn nothing!), your professor will tell you how product placement fees in film were essentially born out of the M&M/Reese's Pieces dealings with ET. Maybe you'll also learn that companies pay product placement fees for new products, not old ones. Being a Canadian production, it makes more sense. I bet that one of the producers or prop masters simply owned a couple of Atari systems and wanted to use them on film. If Cronenburg plays Atari as well, then the use of Atari's two oldest carts may well have been symbolic. It's hard to say for sure, Cronenburg is a weird guy. Yes, I would whole-heartedly agree. I would bet anything that "product placement" is not at issue here. This isn't Hollywood, this isn't the 90s/early 2000s, this is Toronto in the 70s/early 80s. Director applies for Arts Grant, director gets money, director scraps together what he can with said money, director makes movie. I think the only "symbolism" in the two games is that these were probably the only two games that he or his buddy had. I also highly doubt that it "sat on a shelf" because, again, this is Canada. You are given a grant, you make the movie, you release it. No Hollywood politics, no waiting for the right timing (especially then), you just put it out. Besides, why would the fastest-growing company in the world at the time (or close to it) bother with a couple thousand on some Canadian homegrown film? It wasn't a cult classic when it was being made, and chances were pretty good it would be as famous as any other entirely Canadian movie you have ever heard of. If anything, Atari probably would have demanded money to let them use it in the first place... ~G

Activision, hands down, is the best overall software creater including Atari. ~G

That's like asking how many licks to the centre of a Tootsie Pop. [spoiler ALERT] (The answer is 3) ~G

No problem -- just use the Atari Webserver. I believe the cartridge has been out for some time now. Don't know the capacity, but since it is a web server, it must be huge... Read all about it... http://www.humanclock.com/atariserver.php ~G

Dig Dug. ~G

Sounds good, but I wouldn't penalize people for playing a copy or rom verses real copy. We are just looking to get people involved. ...which could, by default allow homebrews since they are available on ROM, no? ~G

I think that an important side note too is that this is about the time that Activision and then Imagic began to show the world that there were more possiblities for the 2600 than blocky graphics. You start seeing sharper images, definite steps forward in graphics, and then Pac Man comes out for Atari and it's like Maze Craze except blockier with headache-inducing flicker. I remember thinking that the future of carts was going to be in the hands of third-party vendors (okay, not that succinctly, but you get the point). It also wasn't that big of a disappointment for me -- I was never that big of a Pac Man fan anyway. But it doesn underline the point -- Atari created production pieces on deadline (couldn't used the 8k, but couldn't delay for the sake of quality...!) while Activision et al. took the time to make masterpieces. Someone above mentioned "why would Atari want to sell crap after they built their consumer base" -- well, that's a big part of why they fell apart. IMHO, ~G

The picture wasn't "made" by Universal -- I imagine it was simply a distribution deal. Videodrome, like almost all Canadian films, is what you might call an indie film (albeit financed by the National Film Board of Canada, and today other government funding sources). The great thing about the arrangement is that once you get the funding, you have pretty much free rein and artistic freedom with no producers looking over your shoulder and nobody telling you that you "can't do that". Which is why so many of the cult classics including Cronenberg's films get made in the first place, and get made in Canada. The downside is that relative to Hollywood terms, the funding isn't great. Which is also why so many of the cult classics including Cronenberg's films get made in the first place, and get made in Canada. So the fact that the film featured old Atari games is incidental -- probably just what he could find lying around. It had nothing to do with "placement advertising" or anything else. And it certainly had nothing to do with Universal or WB. ~G

It looks like to me that they are 2600 compatible, so probably not Odyssey 2. They look similar to O2 though -- they also look close to the Tandy joysticks. But neither one had coiled cords, if I remember rightly. At the same time, although they look like 2600 compatible, I don't remember ever seeing them for the 2600. My guess would be they were a third-party joystick manufacturer who produced them for the Vic-20 or C-64 (both of which also used Atari-style joysticks...) The ones on the left are Gemsticks. ~G

... I don't equate $200 today to 1980. My point is that many things cost less than they did in 1980, even in 1980's dollars. We as a whole value things differently today than we did 26 years ago... Today we throw shit out. Back then we repaired things, as it cost less to repair than replace. It is the opposite now. I still would rather fix something than throw it out. If it can be fixed, it is a waste to replace it, in my opinion. And no I'm not cheap or poor either. Part of it is fiscal responsibility to my own retirement, the rest is environmental. We bury too much in landfills. Okay, I think we are all comparing apples with oranges with kiwis. Straight up, $200 took longer to make on average in 1980 than it does now, but also bought a lot more. I don't think anyone is going to argue with that. (And if you do, stop reading now 'cuz there's just no point...) I think a better comparison in the relative value of gaming consoles is the good ol' computer. For a good many years now (6 or 7?), you could buy a cheap computer at my local Future Shop for about $500, a decent one for about $800, and a gaming workhorse for about $1,200. Laptops range from about $900 to about $3,300. The prices haven't really changed, but the technology has. $1,200 seven years ago got you a brand new Pentium II with Windows 98, and now it gets you a Dual Core with XP Media Edition. In a sense, this is marketing -- the companies have found the prices that their customers are willing to pay, and then put together the packages at today's tech that meet those price points and allow for profit. A similar thing is happening in consoles, just every couple of years instead of every week. Sony figures they can get $X amount and by selling Y amount of consoles, will end up with $Z amount in sales. And yes, that is marketing too. But what the "History of Console Prices" is saying is that in 1977 it cost you $200 to buy an Atari, which in today's dollars would be the equivalent of $600 (or whatever). That is more than PS2, but less than NeoGeo (whatever the hell game that was). It is not saying the Atari is "worth" more, or that the technology is equivalent, it is just one simple way of putting it all into perspective. Frankly, I would have thought the Atari would be the highest. From here on out, it doesn't matter how lifelike the graphics get to be, how interactive the gameplay is, how deafening the sound is, nothing will ever beat the enraptured facination I had when I first played Combat Tank at Sears. It's a feeling that inflation will never catch up to... ~G