Chadivision

You guys are making it really hard for me to pick a label! There are so many great submissions!

There have been some awesome entries in the label contest. I checked out some of the artwork on your site and it was really cool. I hope that you submit a label. You have a unique style and I think it would be interesting to see what you come up with.

I have some experience as an Atari 2600 programmer. I have a pretty good understanding about how the hardware works, but I have only written one game so far (Backfire). Backfire is much simpler than this, but some of the same ideas apply. In Backfire I used an algorithmic level generator like I described. That may not be the best route to take with this game, but I wanted to throw the idea out there. I might be interested in working on this, but I don't have a lot of time to spend on it. I still have to finish some last minute modifications to Backfire and write the instruction manual before it's released. I want to learn some more programming tricks and optimizations before I start another project. I also have a lot of business stuff going on right now. If I did program this it would take me quite a while and I wouldn't be able to commit to a definate timeframe. If that doesn't work for you, I hope someone else can dedicate more time to it because it is a really great idea.

The multiple screen thing is a good idea. I think it should be doable. One other option would be writing a level generating section of the program as opposed to designing each level individually. The downside is that you would lose a lot of control over level design (which would probably be one of the key elements of the game), but the upside is that is would save on ROM space and it would make the game less predictable. One other idea that we haven't brought up yet would be to have sections of the screen that change color. For example you might be really well hidden, but then suddenly the color changes and you are visible again. You could even link the color changing to an object in the game (a switch or target of some kind) that the players could manipulate. You could also have a switch that makes it so that players will flash a different color every few seconds so that you can get an idea of where they are without making them completely visible (like the flame in Mountain King). As far as the AI I'm not very experienced in that department. I don't think the problem would be keeping the computer from "seeing" a hidden player. I think the major problem would be the overall complexity of the AI. I'm not saying it couldn't be done, but it may involve some major tradeoffs. This game would take quite a bit of planning up front and I think that a major design choice would be to decide whether to make it a complex 2 player only game or a simpler 1 or 2 player game. On the one hand a 2 player only game would have a more limited audience and would be more difficult to play in an emulator, but it would be more fun to play with 2 people.

Cybergoth suggested not using PF0. That is a great idea and, just to clarify, you would actually only lose 4 bits on each side of the screen because even though PF0 is 8 bits long, only 4 of the bits are used. The idea of a reflected playfield was also suggested. That is another great idea. One other option is to use a repeated playfield, where instead of a mirror image (reversed) the right side is just copied. In order to make the levels more interesting you could also switch modes mid screen so that some scanlines are reflected and others are repeated. That would only cost you five cycles each time you switched modes. LDA #$(some value) 2 cycles STA ctrlpf 3 cycles There may even be some optimazation tricks to cut down on this. One thing to keep in mind is that if you decide not to use PF0 and then use a repeated playfield, you are no longer losing 4 bits on the right side of the screen, it's just to the right of the middle of the screen. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but you would want to take it into account in your level design. The main issue is how you are going to work with the programmer because a lot of the level design will be based on the programming restraints. I guess you have three options depending on how much time you want to put in and how much control you want over the project. 1. Give the programmer a general concept for the game and let them write the game themselves. 2. Design some levels and have the programmer modify them as necessary to make it work. 3. Learn VCS programming and write it yourself. It looks like it will be a great game.

One other thing that I have found helpful is to focus on enjoying the process of writing a game (and not just finishing the game). That way you don't get discouraged even if you don't have a lot of time to program. I think it's kind of like guys who like to tinker with old cars. The finished product will be cool, but the tinkering is the fun part.

I didn't realize that Atari Age has that adapter also. I guess the benefit of dealing with them is that Albert will sell you the adapter without trying to pressure you into buying a cell phone.

Just a couple of thoughts. The Cuttle Cart is great. I used it to develop my first (and so far only) homebrew, Backfire. I have also looked throught the homebrewing tutorials and they are really well written. When I started messing around with this stuff about 3 years ago, I wasn't able to find anything nearly as complete as these. There was a lot of information, but no step by step tutorials. I wish these had been around when I started. I haven't posted on the Stella list very much, but I have read a lot of the posts. There is some really good information there. Just about any question that you can think of has already been answered there. I also used to think how cool it would be to make Atari games and I have to tell you that it feels really good to have completed one. I think that Atari homebrew programming is a really cool art form. Everyone knows someone that can paint or play the piano (not to diminish this), but how many people do you know that can write Atari games? How many people do you know that even know that you CAN make your own Atari games? I have had a great time with my first game and I hope to create several more.

Those white dots are usually caused by a poor connection between the Atari and the TV. Check to make sure that your cable is not loose. It could also be a deffective or worn out switchbox. If the switchbox is the problem, you can get a new one at Radio Shack. If you don't need to have anything else plugged into you coax input in the TV you shouldn't use the switchbox. Instead, you can get an RCA to coax adapter. That will give you a better connection. It is also available at Radio Shack. If you go to get the RCA to coax adapter (also called RCA to F connector) they will probably tell you that you need an RF modulator for about $30. That isn't true. If that happens, they're not trying to lie to you, they probably just misunderstood you. The reason I say this is that I used to work at Radio Shack and people would always come in looking for an RCA to F connector adapter to hook up a DVD player. In that case you do need the RF modulator becuase the signal itself needs to be converted, not just the plug. In the case of the 2600, the signal is already an RF signal, so all you need is the adapter. I hope this helps.

It's also the CRAPPIEST game in the crappiest series. I don't really think it was a great game I just like the fact that after spending hours on Earthworld to get 3 clues they owed me an easier Swordquest, and I finally got it with Waterworld. I always thought that Swordquest was a great concept, but the games just weren't fun. The main thing that I remember about Swordquest is that my dad bought Earthworld when it first came out. I was only about 6 years old then and two of my brothers were younger than I was. Dad didn't let us play it because for some reason he thought that we would destroy the comic book before he got a chance to figure out the puzzle. Finally we talked him into letting us play (and we did destroy the comic book). I think that the fact the it was "forbidden fruit" along with the contests made it seem kind of magical, but every time I started to play, I relized how boring those games are.

We could really go for the "retro" look and carve them into stone tablets, but the shipping would get a little expensive.

Waterworld is the best game ever made, for one simple reason. It is the only Swordquest game that I can actually beat. I used to have a copy of Waterworld and my brother let a friend borrow all of our Atari stuff and we never got any of it back. That was back around '90 or '91. Back then we thought of the Atari as just that box of stuff that we haven't had hooked up since we got our NES. Later, we regretted not having it. I spent years saying I would love to play Adventure again. If only we still had it. Then finally it occured to me that there just might be more than one Atari 2600 left in the world and I bought another one. I think that the fact that I lost my original collection made it more fun to get into collecting again. I loved the NES just as much at the time, but I'm not into it now because I still have all of those games. The moral of the story is... if anyone finds a guy from Ohio named Kenny who has a copy of Waterworld. Forward it to me immediately because it's MINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I once played the microwave for 7 hours before I realized that is wasn't my Atari.

Getting everyone's permission would take a while, but it wouldn't be that bad. All you would need is the permission to use the labels that have already been created and either a screenshot or (to be more like the original catalogs) an artist's drawing of a screenshot. You really wouldn't need to run the page by each individual programmer and artist as long as they agreed to let you use the label, screenshot, and a text description of the game. The original catalogs just had the games grouped by type and on the side of the page had a drawing that represented that type of game. I guess that would be a little harder to do with homebrews because they are probably harder to group by genre. It might make sense to dedicate a larger amount of space to each game since there wouldn't be as many games as the orignal catalogs had (about 50 games). I don't know anything about printing. Does anyone have an estimate about the cost?

I just had an idea while I was looking through the submissions for the Backfire label contest. Have any of you artists considered putting together an Atari style catalog that shows all of the homebrew games that are currently available? That might be another cool contest to have. Assuming you got everyone's permission you could use the existing label artwork for the individual games and all you would have to do is come up with a layout and create some additional artwork as needed. Or if anyone was feeling really adventurous they could team up with a homebrew programmer to make a comic for a new homebrew game (kind of like Swordquest). I don't know if anyone has done this yet, but it would be pretty cool.

I can't beleive how may great labels have been submitted so far. Maybe instead of picking a winner, Backfire should just have about 15 different label variations! (just kidding)

I'm not talking about making a game that requires you to buy a new controller (unless someone came up with a really cool controller that makes the gameplay much more interesting). I would possibly consider using the Star Raiders controller. I have two or three of them, but I didn't know how common they are. I wouldn't want anyone to miss out on the game because the don't have one or don't feel like buying one. I did think of one problem with a game that uses a joystick and a paddle. When you have to switch to the paddle, it could get annoying if you accidentally pick up the wrong paddle and get killed right away because your control isn't working. There are some ways around this. I could have the system sense which one is being used and read that input, and ignore the other one. That would be pretty easy to implement.

I was thinking of possibly making a game where you use the joystick for one level and the paddles for another level. I would make it so that you use seperate controller ports obviously. That would be kind of cool. I might be wrong, but I don't think anyone has done that before. Another possibility would be a 2 player cooperative game where one player (or two players for that matter) use the paddles and one uses the joystick. Obviously the control scheme would depend on the specifics of the game. If I wanted to be a real jerk I could make it so that you actually have to unplug one controller and plug in another in the middle of the game. That would still be more fun than being captured by that stupid scientist in E.T.!

The main reason I ask is because even though I love some of the paddle controller games, I will very seldom go to the trouble of digging out the paddles and plugging them in. When I do, the next game I want to play is usually a joystick game and I have to switch again. I guess it's a little strange that I will take the time to write a game, but I won't take 10 seconds to switch controllers. Maybe I'm just weird.

Just for future reference, would most of you prefer to buy homebrew games that only use the joystick controller, or would you be just as likely to be interested in games that use the paddle controllers or maybe even the Star Raiders pad? I don't have any immediate plans for another game, but I'm kind of kicking around some ideas. Thanks

I think that new games are like old games. Some are really great, some are really bad, and some are just ok. I don't think that great graphics = a great game, but it can add to the experience. I will agree that there are a lot of games that look cool but lack substance, but there are also games like the Grand Theft Auto series that are truely innovative. Years from now, people will be remebering Playstation2 and XBox and saying "They don't make 'em like that anymore. Sure these new games have fancy 3D hollograms that understand what you are saying and talk back to you, but the gameplay sucks!"

Todd, I would love to get together and play Atari sometime. The only problem is that as much as I love video games, I suck at just about every game that has ever been made. It would still be fun though. I was trying to think about what I could beat you at, and I came up with one thing. This will be my 44th post at Atari Age and I see that you have posted 42 times, so right now I'm winning. I'm going to pretend that's something to be proud of. Have you tried my new homebrew, "Backfire"? I'm curious to see if you can roll the counter. I can get about half way there. On second thought, I don't know if I want you to play it since right now I have the world record (5,125). I'll bet it would take you a good 25 minutes to beat that score!

I am very impressed with the quality of the entries! I think it's going to be pretty difficult to choose. I am glad to have so many great artists contributing. Keep up the good work.

You have two guns; one on the top of the screen and one on the bottom. You can control one gun at a time and you have to shoot spaceships and UFOs that fly through the middle. The difficult part of the game is that if you are not careful you can shoot your own gun if the shot goes all the way across the screen. Also, there are moving barriers. If you accidentally shoot one of the barriers your shot is reflected back at you and you have to get out of the way. Hopefully that description will give you some ideas.

I checked out some of the art on your page. It's really cool. I just wrote a homebrew game called "Backfire". The label artwork contest just started a couple of days ago. You can get more information in the contests forum. I hope that you will consider submitting some artwork for the contest. At some point I would like to get into doing some home made PC games, or possibly a homebrew for PS2 or XBox. I don't have any immediate plans to take on a new programming project, but I will keep you in mind for the future. When I do write another game, I am definately going to need someone to do the art.