Jump to content
p.opus

Is there ANY possibility of a Boulder Dash Re-issue

Recommended Posts

... I seriously want this game now, but I think I only want it because I know it won't ever be released again.

 

Plus, I don't actually have an Atari 2600 to play it on. Or a TV that I could even connect an Atari 2600 to if I had one.

But homebrews... :sad:

 

 

Don't think about it and you won't want it. Don't let the collectard mentality fog your brain. So-called "collectors" have wrecked the hobby for thousands upon thousands of gamers with all this hoarding stuff. Not only that, but they try and create a desire in your head in hopes that you will pay them money to get what they have.

 

*I maintain zero respect for such activity.* Zero respect for artificial scarcity. All it does is create dissension in the ranks and makes one feel empty. Whether it be classic cars or videogames and comics. The only time I have respect for a rare limited edition is when the rarity is naturally created by time and attrition. When no intent of artificial scarcity was envisioned during production.

Keatah so you are basically saying you don't support development and sale of homebrew games for play on original hardware??? :ponder:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where do you get the idea I have no respect for homebrews? The "they" are the collectors and hoarders and limited-edition publishers/licensors.

 

I have ZERO RESPECT FOR ARTIFICIAL SCARCITY.

I have nothing but respect for the dudes that make homebrews.

 

Most homebrews you can buy at any time. And if they're not available anymore its likely their roms still are, or will be at some later date.

 

The premise surrounding a limited run of BD VCS is to protect the value of the investment of the original purchasers. The licensor said so itself. That immediately means high prices if any get resold. That's the artificial scarcity I dislike. I can't stand that shit. And some 10 or 20 years ago decided not baggie-chase the crap.

 

If for example Star Castle or StayFrosty 2 are not available for purchase anymore in the future, I'm ok with that because it was never the developer's or publisher's intent to limit the production and stifle the fun. Production cessation would just kinda have happened as a matter of time. I think it's great they made the roms available and if I had to have a cart I could make one up. Or do emulators or multi-carts. But anyways, the games are available for me and fellow gamers to have fun with.

 

Developers and publishers like so have my gratitude and are on my list to get something nice from us in 2020.

 

I know far too many collectors and just abhor the haughtiness and pomposity they exude.

 

ADDED:

Have it be known I'm not interested in getting a BD VCS cart or rom. If somehow the rom became available it would be thrown in a misc directory. My BD experience, like I said before, revolves around the Apple II.

Edited by Keatah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the number of people buying anything just to have it in their "collections" is very very limited. So limited that you don't have to bother at all...

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an original owner of a Boulder Dash cart, let me just say that I would be all for more carts getting made. "Annoying a few collectors" should not be a factor for more games getting made or not. I really don't understand why First Star Software would even take that stance. I didn't buy the cart to enshrine it and hope that it would some day pay off my son's college tuition. I bought it for several reasons: I followed its development; I contributed a couple label designs (that didn't make it); it is a fantastic technical achievement; and I bought it to play (and I kind of suck at it :) ). Nowhere on my list was "Wow! This is going to be worth something some day!". Collectors know what they're in for when they take on the hobby of collecting. Carts gain and lose value all the time. In 50 years somebody will ask, "Why didn't they make more of these?" and someone will answer "Oh, because they didn't want to annoy a collector.". Right now it may sound like a good idea, but in 50 years when someone is trying to make a preservation effort for this particular port, it's going to sound ridiculous. Let the market, and not a few collectors, decide if more copies should be made. It's a game, not an investment.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The hell with those goddamned collectors. They're nothing but parasites. I hate them all. I'll buy 25 of something just to piss them off for fun - and have done so.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an original owner of a Boulder Dash cart, let me just say that I would be all for more carts getting made. "Annoying a few collectors" should not be a factor for more games getting made or not. I really don't understand why First Star Software would even take that stance. I didn't buy the cart to enshrine it and hope that it would some day pay off my son's college tuition. I bought it for several reasons: I followed its development; I contributed a couple label designs (that didn't make it); it is a fantastic technical achievement; and I bought it to play (and I kind of suck at it :) ). Nowhere on my list was "Wow! This is going to be worth something some day!". Collectors know what they're in for when they take on the hobby of collecting. Carts gain and lose value all the time. In 50 years somebody will ask, "Why didn't they make more of these?" and someone will answer "Oh, because they didn't want to annoy a collector.". Right now it may sound like a good idea, but in 50 years when someone is trying to make a preservation effort for this particular port, it's going to sound ridiculous. Let the market, and not a few collectors, decide if more copies should be made. It's a game, not an investment.

Well said. I feel exactly the same way.

Bought to support AA and the coders - as I followed the end of development, the technical achievement, and to play.

(Just saying. Not to annoy the creators or First Star Software.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FSS's best known games, Boulder Dash and Spy vs. Spy, were ported to iOS and Android. BD was done by TapStar Interactive and SvS by Chillingo. It exists merely as a licensing company as far as I can tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Realistically it's up to a capable programmer to talk with the developers of Boulderdash 2600 and see how much of the engine could be re-used for a non-trademark infringing game. Call it "Dashing for Diamonds" or something. New levels. New title screen and music. New graphics.

 

How about a port of Skulldiggery from the Atari ST?

 

I doubt there would be any problems with copyright. As far as I know Nexus no longer exists and, at one point, the game was even given away for free on a magazine disk back in the day.

 

The early levels make the game seem easier than it is but the game gets a lot tougher as it progresses. My #1 desert island game for the ST and I actually prefer it to Boulderdash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good idea, except that I am not interested. I have no relationship to or memory regarding these games.

 

I did BD because I knew the original and loved it. So I would do BD 2 for the same reason and because there is still room for improvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The premise surrounding a limited run of BD VCS is to protect the value of the investment of the original purchasers. The licensor said so itself. That immediately means high prices if any get resold. That's the artificial scarcity I dislike. I can't stand that shit. And some 10 or 20 years ago decided not baggie-chase the crap.

 

 

Though it may seem like it to you, this is not really the case. The reality is that we were legally required as part of the contract with FSS to pay the significant royalty payments for all 250 copies up-front before any sales were made. Given the significant price point required to cover the costs of production and royalties, this actually drove the selection of how many units were produced. It wasn't about limiting the market - it was about making a reasonable guess as to how many units we might reasonably sell, and how much money we could afford to fork out, out of our own pockets. Now I don't know about you, but personally I didn't and don't have thousands of spare dollars lying around that I can commit to such a thing. The 250 unit limit was worked out to minimise our (authors') risk and get as many copies out there as we could. In hindsight, the number was about right.

 

Regardless of what anyone has said, or what you think they said, we tried to make as many copies as we thought would sell, and not leave ourselves open to making a loss. The other side of the coin is, that even IF there would be a re-release contemplated, we would once again have to go through negotiations with FSS, and pay up-front royalties for some nominated number of copies - again a huge risk. How many would you be prepared to pre-pay royalties for - 100? 200? Not so easy, when you're talking thousands and thousands of dollars personal outlay as a royalty payment.

 

In short, we signed a contract, paid out money and then waited a year to recoup our outlay. We paid in advance for the royalties AND all the production costs. It wasn't a great deal for us (authors) and there was a certain element of risk for us. FSS were friendly and accommodating - but they were also very rigid and legalistic. There wasn't any room for flexibility as far as numbers of units go or when/how the royalties were payable. We made an agreement (legal), notified everyone exactly what that agreement was, and then we stuck to it.

 

This idea of "artificial scarcity" is not really true - there are other factors, as I have mentioned, applying. I do understand your points and that you want endless copies of games to be available. Sometimes, commercial reality really does limit the ability of a publisher/author to produce more than a limited number of copies. Too bad if you want it to be endless, but in short I'm NOT prepared to front up with another huge whack of money to produce another run. The risk is high, and my funds are low.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for setting it straight. Too bad they wouldn't agree on smaller batches as needed. Say 10 or 20. Pay royalties. Sell them. Repeat till the market saturates.

 

Another option is pre-orders. Accept payment, when a "critical mass" is reached, buy a licensing package and begin production. And offer a refund at any point up to the actual production beginning. There's a piece of add-on hardware for the Apple II that works in similar fashion.

 

Disclaimer - I am not the target audience for a BD VCS cart.

Edited by Keatah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should be thankful that a company is supporting and allowing a "peanuts" release of just 250 carts. Try that with e.g. Activision or whoever now owns the Atari brand. I doubt FSS made any money with it, after deducting all the costs they had. And with even smaller batches, the overhead required would most likely cause them to loose money.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Though it may seem like it to you, this is not really the case. The reality is that we were legally required as part of the contract with FSS to pay the significant royalty payments for all 250 copies up-front before any sales were made.

Oh, man, I can't believe that that's how they structured the deal. Hearing that makes me think that you guys are even *more* amazing now...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, man, I can't believe that that's how they structured the deal. Hearing that makes me think that you guys are even *more* amazing now...

 

You know, it's years ago now and I can't quite remember exactly how it turned out. Albert helped us out a lot and I didn't personally have to fork out any money. I think there were early payments and FSS got their money up-front, way before any payments were made to any other parties. But I can't recall exactly when FSS got the first payment, relative to when the cartridges were sold/released. But the point is still valid - there was a prohibitive up-front payment (even if just for materials, but my memory says for royalties too) which we needed to cover as a result of the agreement. I'm not dissin' FSS - they were totally friendly and professional ALL the way. They just drove a very hard bargain.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just checked my mails.

 

We payed the first FSS invoice (1/3rd) even before we got the label finished and the remaining money ~4 months later. Which was in sync with the release date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see no reason why Andrew and Thomas and Albert should have to risk their money again for a re-release. The first time around must have been incredibly stressful. Undoubtedly the terms from FSS would be identical or nearly so in all material respects. FSS's costs the first time around were probably spent on legal fees to draw up a contract. This time they have a contract in place where only numbers and dates would need to change, so it may be somewhat easier from their perspective the second time around.

 

I would suggest that if this were to happen at all, it would have to be with a money collected up front with a minimum buy-in, say 100 fully pre-paid preorders (with refunds if the number is not met within a set period of time.) I doubt that it would be worth it to either party for 25 to 50 carts. Let people put their money where their mouth is if they want Boulderdash on the 2600.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the perfect number was already sold. People had to buy second copies after not enough people actually committed to buy as they said they wanted it made and would buy a copy and when it was completed backed out. So yeah if people want it made so bad their own money should be given up to have it made. Seems very unfair for a few to take the risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a Kickstater that gives the carts as rewards but the goal of the campaign is to get enough money to convince them to release the ROM? Anyway, my memory needs refreshed. What was the original reason(s) to go to them, make a contract, and pay royalties in the first place? Are other homebrewers who make remakes, ports, clones, hacks, etc. of games paying royalties?

Edited by Schizophretard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe a Kickstarter?

Good idea, but remember to add the fees that the Company (Kickstarter) will take. 25 percent (?)

 

If people complained about the high 2600 game cost (actually lower than CIB for other consoles), just wait until they see it higher than the first time. They will remember the original cost, but won't realize Kickstarter fee charges.

 

Through Kickstarter it will add almost $20 per game. However if it gets noticed through social media and gaming websites like Star Castle 2600 did, who knows how many orders it might end up with? 200, 400, 500+?

Plus if Kickstarter fails nobody is charged.

 

To the last person's post: You have to Kickstarter a prototyped item, you can't Kickstarter an idea or possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...