jbanes

Hi all! I know it's weird to bump this thread, but I have some news on this project. First, some background. Back in 2007 when I was working on this game two major shifts in my life occurred: I bought my first home and moved my family out to the suburbs My position at the company I worked for was eliminated after a merger created two redundant departments In the chaos of these two events happening on top of each other (not to mention starting a really cool new job!) I thought I'd lost all the work on Deimos Lander. I couldn't find the code in my development folder and it seemed that any backups I had were far behind the current state of the project. I was able to create a Flash / Wii version based on the 4K version of the game since the source code for that was backed up in this thread. (Contrary to other posts on the matter, the 8-level Flash version was exactly the same as the final 4K version of the game.) Recently I started messing about with RetroPie. RetroPie, for those who don't know, is a combined emulation platform on Raspberry Pi. It's a great way to relive old consoles. And when I loaded my ROM stash up into the RetroPie I was shocked to find that the copy of Deimos Lander was the 32K version! I don't think it has all the levels I had completed when the project was shelved, but it was close. Searching my backups based on the ROM date I was able to find the source code backed up in a place I wouldn't have thought it would be. And so, after ten years I can finally give everyone a Christmas present. The 32K version of Deimos Lander! Now before you get too excited, the game still isn't complete. But it's pretty far along and is highly playable. It works on Stella, RetroPie, and even the AtGames Handheld! Which is pretty cool. Especially for software I never thought I'd see again. I'm also attaching a ZIP of my toolchain directory. This has the source and everything I used to build it. Note that it's a bit of a mess due to a combination of the Alpha state of BatariBasic and a ton of customizations and specialized tools being created. Since I don't know what tools are active you'll find a bunch of stuff that may not be needed. But everything you need should be there if anyone wants to develop the code further. Merry Christmas everyone and I hope you enjoy! deimos.bas.bin Deimos32K WIP.zip

@Dragur - A lot of good ideas here! I'll have to nick a few of these... I see you and I think alike! That's sort of the same thing I was thinking of when I created the main guns on the Dreadnaught. You may notice that they flicker a warning beam before rapidly expanding and blasting you into oblivion!!! MWHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Expanding into planet killing? Maaaaayyyybbbeeeee.... I just got the Gamestick Mark II prototype in the mail, so you can see the Create Jam version of the game being played in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dX_cfTs77Q Edit: As I said, you and I think alike....

Thanks man! I appreciate it.

Thanks for the feedback BHG! I went back and forth on whether to scroll vertically or horizontally. Both were accurate reproductions considering that the original Intellivision version scrolled sideways. Ultimately it was the 16:9 display that swayed my opinion. Going vertical with 16:9 would prevent the player from seeing very far ahead while giving him a far less useful view of the breadth of the battlecruiser. As you pointed out, I put a lot of work into the mechanics to make them feel good. So I think you'll like it in practice. If you don't, you know who to chase down and hold at gunpoint until it gets fixed... P.S. Don't forget to ! I won't get very far in the contest without more likes...

Thanks 0078265317! Someone pointed out in chat that the art isn't as good as it could be. I should probably mention that the contest I created the prototype for required me to finish in 10 days. What you see in the video is where I ran out of time.

"I'd certainly nominate [The Dreadnaught Factor] for remake status. With some visual upgrades, it would make a great XBLA download." -IGN Review "A cheapo remake [of The Dreadnaught Factor] on XBOX Live Arcade would be a blast..." -flojomojo "Would also like to see a remake of an old Intellivision game called 'The Dreadnought Factor' (also on the atari 5200)" -Andifferous This needed doing. So I did it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85j1Agw6Zgw The current version is just a prototype for the CREATE Jam contest. The prototype runs on generic Android hardware with an attached game controller. (e.g. Ouya dev hardware, an MK808 stick, or a Nexus 7 tablet) The game is ultimately going to be developed for the Ouya and GameStick game consoles. If anyone is interested in trying the prototype, let me know and I'll post the APK file. Note that I need your support to progress in the CREATE Jam contest. Please support me in the contest by liking the video below! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpLWWQ85VuE Hope you like it, and I'd love to hear your thoughts!

Good grief, Charlie Brown. All y'all are far too details oriented to be proper analysts. There's seeing the tree, then there's seeing the forest. You guys are stuck staring at the tree. (Hey, that's some nice looking bark you got there! ) Riddle me this: If the keyboard was truly "shipped" why was the FTC fining Mattel $10,000 a day? If the keyboard was truly "shipped" why was the ECS released? If the ColecoVision was such a solid home computer by itself, why did the Adam expansion only use the video out? Were the Coleco* and Intellivision engineers stupid or otherwise simply incompetent? And a few just for the kewl cat: If these multifunction systems like the GX4000 were superior jacks of all trades, why did they fail to displace the IBM PC? Does a microprocessor or single graphics chip make an entire machine? What are the fundamental differences between a given PC and a game console? (e.g. PS3 vs. PC) How many people do you know who use a PS3 for their desktop computer? If the XBox was basically a PC computer (which I'm well aware of, thank you) why didn't Microsoft repeat that design with the XBox 360? The answers to these questions and more tie back to conclusions that are difficult to escape. Baseless arguing of semantics rather than looking at the big picture only does a disservice to yourselves and prevents a proper analysis. (Oh, and stop saying that the Adam failed because it was an expansion. I never said that and I don't appreciate the words being inserted into my mouth.) * I suppose I could be convinced about the Coleco engineers.

Clearly, YOU DON'T KNOW JACK! :lol: :lol:

We seem to have a failure to communicate here. The Intellivision keyboard promised to consumers and intended for delivery never shipped. In its place a cut-down replacement keyboard DID ship. (Which I referred to as a "non-working facsimile".) That is the facts of the situation which are beyond argument. Now whether or not the ECS was a reasonable replacement for the original keyboard component is up for debate. I say it wasn't and that it didn't meet the intended goals. It ended up being more of a keyboard for the Inty and less of an actual computer expansion. On top of that, I recall there being quality control problems because it was so cheap. Either way, it never had its intended effect of giving consumers a home computer. I'll keep an eye out for it. I've seen the full computer many times, but I can't say I've ever seen the expansion. The Adam wasn't popular because of the manufacturing problems they had, and because you needed the printer connected and on to run the thing. It was never an issue of expansion vs. non-expansion. Again, to clarify: I am talking specifically about the expansion. Regardless of the general problems with the Adam, no one then (or now) was sitting there saying, "This is a good idea. It's too bad about the problems." The general reaction was almost certainly, "This is too expensive for an add-on!" In fact, you probably have access to some data that would help make the point more clearly. Do you know how many expansion units were sold vs. the number of full-up Adam computers sold? I'm willing to bet there was a massive disparity between them.

According to the Blue Sky Rangers they did ship through mail order, it just never hit wide distribution. Your link agrees with me: I call it "non-working" because (to the best of my recollection) the quality was poor. Plus it was cut back so much it did not truly achieve the task of making the Intellivision into a computer. That was expansion module 3, which was the Super Game Module not a computer module. Expansion Module 3 was replaced with the Adam computer expansion. It seems I need to amend my statement. I had not realized that the Computer Expansion had been released for the the Colecovision. The story I always heard was that the Adam was instead of Expansion #3 rather than in addition to. I don't think my fundamental point is compromised. The fact that we're having this discussion kind of points to the fact that the expansion was not popular. The Expansion #3 was announced at $400 (not sure what the final price was) and a full Adam was $600. As I said, far too expensive of an idea to be practical. Cheaper just to buy a ColecoVision and a C64.

And at the end of the day, a console designed to be a console is better as a console and a computer designed as a computer is better as a computer. The market figured it could fight the economic forces by a piecemeal attack of add-on components for consoles. Just one problem: The cost was too high. The Intellivision keyboard never shipped (though a non-working facsimile did), none of the 2600 keyboards ever took off (most never saw the light of day), the Colecovision "computer" expansion was canceled and replaced with the Adam, and the Odyssey^2 was never exploited as a home computer. Once the C64 got cheap enough, consumers got their computer instead of a video game console. They ultimately realized that the computers were good at some things, but consoles were better at others. The reason why no one ever talked about it after the crash is that it turned out to be a stupid idea. Consumers instead purchased computers if they wanted computers and consoles if they wanted consoles. End of story. And they all lived happily ever after.

Here's the short answer: It was already a video game recession. The recession would have continued for some time, market corrections would have happened, and the market would have slowly recovered. The computer price war turned the recession into a complete disaster. Why? Because it smashed the price separation between computers and video game systems. And the thinking of the time (as typified by the Commodore commercials) was, "Why buy just a game system when you can buy a computer?" (Notice that people stopped talking about making game systems into computers after the crash. )

Best Voltron game EVAR: http://itunes.apple.com/app/voltron/id339883173?mt=8 I love how when you unpause, the game announces: "And now... back to Voltron: Defender of the Universe!"

You forgot #4: 4. Triggered a massive retail purge of video game equipment and software, thus lighting the fuse of the Great Video Game Crash.

I ordered one. I'm hoping to make Coverfire HD universal and support the iControlPad in the process. Could be the best control scheme yet!

No, I don't think so. Dave Cutler still works for Microsoft and (AFAIK) his team never experienced a significant purge. The seeming under-utilization of kernel features has more to do with Microsoft's research being significantly more advanced than their implementation groups. If a feature fails to gain traction with the rest of the company, it can just sit there doing very little in the kernel. Which by no means should suggest that Microsoft won't use it in the future or that customers won't find nifty uses for those kernel features. Many of the features also allow Microsoft to re-tune the kernel for different product lines. The difference between Home, Professional, and Server editions typically consist of system configuration +/- a few management tools. Now if you wanted to make the argument against DEC (who lost Cutler and his team to Microsoft), I could readily support a number of "brain-drain" suppositions.

Semantic quibble, but an important one: I stated that Quantum tanked, not that I have an opinion on its quality as a game. The fact that Quantum did poorly is simply a historical fact that is beyond dispute. My argument is that Atari would not have seen GCC as a good resource for creating non-port games after that debacle. Agreed. However, I'm saying that having GCC was fairly useless without a games pipeline to feed them. The relatively poor quality of the 7800 library was two fold: 1. Poor implementation (which GCC could help with) 2. Poor IP (which GCC could not help with) On final analysis, #2 was the more important issue to resolve from a business perspective. Simple swallowing GCC and making them a first party developer would have resulted in another Odyssey^2. A bunch of homogeneously-styled games that no one really cared about. Speaking from my experience in the software industry, here's how it would have played out in an ideal world: 1. Atari begins obtaining contracts for kick-ass ports and/or invests heavily in in-house game designers 2. Games being produced are of sub-standard quality. (Think: Double Dragon) Management demands explanation and is told that "the system is not capable". 3. Management (not being stupid) contacts GCC for help. GCC contracts on a few games and re-develops a solid relationship with Atari. 4. Default answer from developers on quality issues becomes, "We need GCC's help." 5. Atari does not fold and eventually acquires GCC in-house to save money. Investors see a massive savings and potential for greater returns. Win-Win for everyone. I think you'll agree when I say, "Atari failed at step 1".

Because the technology is worthless without the people who know how to maintain and enhance it. I know that's a very modern view, but that's something that used to really bug me about the corporate market. They seemed to think that technology somehow existed in a vacuum. Yet technology can easily be best described as an expression of a person or team's knowledge and understanding. Taking the expression without the source will give the tech a very short shelf-life, indeed! Not historically helpful in the slightest, but I needed to get that off my chest.

That's really cool! I searched the archives some more and came across this article: http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=lORNAAAAIBAJ&sjid=GoQDAAAAIBAJ&dq=atari%207800&pg=3305%2C5630866 Little did they know...

I hear quite a lot of praise for GCC. And I'm sure they had a good reputation. But let's be careful to understand what that reputation was. After Atari settled with GCC, they were contracted to make two arcade games. The first one (Quantum) completely tanked. It was so bad that arcade operators were sending the machines back and asking for a refund. Food Fight did better, but it was never a AAA title and is not well remembered by the public. In result, I suspect that GCC had a poor reputation for creating original games. Their reputation was more for technical excellence. They could do a kick-ass job in porting a game or developing next-gen hardware. But I doubt anyone was about to use them as a second-party developer for competitive content. In result, the need for GCC tied back somewhat with Atari's need for arcade games. If Atari had rights to popular arcade titles, they could have utilized GCC to port those titles. Otherwise I expect they would have been a very limited resource. (Though seriously: Who sits on a game like Rescue on Fractalus with a name like LucasArts behind it and doesn't get it out the door!?!) Oh yeah. Those 256Mbit cartridges are already on their way from China. Sounds like a fun tech experiment. Probably good for Resident Evil 7800 Edition!

The 7800 sold 3.7 million to Nintendo's 38m US / 61m World. Atari may have been second, but it was not much of a competitor. They hit the market at about the same time (in the US). Fair enough. Still, the NES radically changed the landscape. Once players tried Super Mario Bros and Legend of Zelda, they weren't going back. Then again, I believe Ms. Pac-Man was the top-selling title on the 7800 and was apparently the biggest selling third-party cartridge on the Genesis. Or maybe people just REALLY liked Ms. Pac-Man... I think people REALLY liked Ms. Pac-Man. The Pac-Man series are still big sellers today, 3 decades after they were first relevant. As for it being the top seller on the 7800, I think that says more about the lack of software than anything else. FWIW, backwards compatibility is overrated. It was a big deal when the 5200 came out for two reasons: 1. The 5200 failed to wow due to the technical difficulties 2. Players often sold their 2600 to buy-up, then felt cheated when they had a pile of 2600 games they could no longer play. (An issue which Coleco exploited by offering the 2600 compatibility module. No more feeling cheated, just get the expansion module!) By the era of Genesis, it simply wasn't a bit deal. The Genesis was backwards compatible with the Master System with an adapter, but I hear from very few players who took advantage of it. The SNES eschewed backwards compatibility completely, even though it was MORE feasible than with the Genesis. With more modern consoles, backwards compatibility is a Nice to Have that lets players declutter their living room. It also helps console makers cover the gap when their console is new and software is scarce. Lack of such compatibility would not prevent consoles from flying off the shelves. If the 7800 had a stronger software library, backward compatibility would probably not have been an issue. As it was, the compatibility was as much a liability as it was a benefit. Being associated with that "antique" 2600 game console was not the best way to prove the superiority of your system.

All the best games are at http://www.gog.com Nothing like using the latest beastly machine to run a game designed for a 486*! * Stop laughing! I do it all the time!

Saving the world from EVIL ex-presidents and their plans for a nuclear holocaust!