New Controller Standard for 2600

[BigO]

Well, I think I'm gonna build this thing into a 2600 Vidlid.

 

VIDLID.bmp

 

Vidlid? I see the picture but not quite sure I get it 100%.

 

If you need someone to test it, remember I'm just across town.

[mos6507]

Catching up with this thread. Although I'd like the peripherals on Chimera to be a lure for developers, I do like the idea here to multiplex the booster grip signals for a spinner. In addition to that, there is nothing preventing the use of the pot lines AS PADDLES at the same time as the joystick and fire button. For Death Derby I was hoping someone would design a special router sort of device that would let you mix and match different signals. So you could merge a joystick with paddles or a joystick with the driving controller or two joysticks.

 

You could get some interesting combos. Two paddles with two buttons each, for instance would be useful for an advanced Medieval Mayhem sequel. Atari definitely could have done two buttons per paddle had they wanted to. They use the left and right joystick signals but don't use up and down. Same deal with the driving controller. It uses the joystick trigger but only uses two bits of the joystick lines for the gray code. Lots of wasted I/O.

[Zonie]

One of the earlier schematics depicts using the pot lines for analog joystick inputs, but the coders here tell me that that may not be a good solution due to the processing time needed to read it correctly. Thinking of how bad analog sticks were back in the early IBM PC days, I decided that keeping the joystick inputs to the dedicated digital inputs and using the pots for extra butons (or spinner) made more sense after I got a look at how the booster grip works. Us hardware guys gotta collaborate with the software guys.

 

I think the Chimera is a great idea, and hope to see it come to fruition, but this is sort of a cheap step along the way.

[Zonie]

Go to Ebay item: 300226424545 for pics of the vid lid

[horseboy]

All of this tech talk is way over my head, but I am wondering why you guys are so set on creating analog controls. Why not use both ports and have a six button controller? That seems like it might be easier for homebrewer's to take advantage of.

[Zonie]

All of this tech talk is way over my head, but I am wondering why you guys are so set on creating analog controls. Why not use both ports and have a six button controller? That seems like it might be easier for homebrewer's to take advantage of.

 

using only one port allows for two-player games.

 

six buttons are too damn many!

[horseboy]

All of this tech talk is way over my head, but I am wondering why you guys are so set on creating analog controls. Why not use both ports and have a six button controller? That seems like it might be easier for homebrewer's to take advantage of.

 

using only one port allows for two-player games.

 

six buttons are too damn many!

 

 

I figured the answer would be along those lines. You don't have to use all six buttons, though. You would just have the option of using up to six. I am sure many homebrewers would've loved to have been able to use more than one button. I see that your designs would have 3 buttons as well, but if you want this thing to be a truly user friendly thing to build at home, your ideas are going to be way over the heads of the vast majority of the people out there. It may seem easy to you guys, but reading a thread like this gives most people a headache. Using a 2 port scheme would be much more straight forward and could be built without even having to hack up any controllers.

 

Although I think it is a great idea, I just don't think that more than a handful of tech-savvy people would even attempt to make it. I could be wrong though. You definitely have a good point about the 2-player games.

[Zonie]

All of this tech talk is way over my head, but I am wondering why you guys are so set on creating analog controls. Why not use both ports and have a six button controller? That seems like it might be easier for homebrewer's to take advantage of.

 

using only one port allows for two-player games.

 

six buttons are too damn many!

 

 

I figured the answer would be along those lines. You don't have to use all six buttons, though. You would just have the option of using up to six. I am sure many homebrewers would've loved to have been able to use more than one button. I see that your designs would have 3 buttons as well, but if you want this thing to be a truly user friendly thing to build at home, your ideas are going to be way over the heads of the vast majority of the people out there. It may seem easy to you guys, but reading a thread like this gives most people a headache. Using a 2 port scheme would be much more straight forward and could be built without even having to hack up any controllers.

 

Although I think it is a great idea, I just don't think that more than a handful of tech-savvy people would even attempt to make it. I could be wrong though. You definitely have a good point about the 2-player games.

 

If this becomes a standard, and hombrewers code for it, then you will see some enterprising person make and sell them. Maybe even the authors themselves. There is always someone out there who will build something for someone.

 

The only controller being hacked up is a driving controller for the encoder, but the spinner may not even become a part of this. maybe it will just be a joystick with three buttons.

[BigO]

All of this tech talk is way over my head, but I am wondering why you guys are so set on creating analog controls. Why not use both ports and have a six button controller? That seems like it might be easier for homebrewer's to take advantage of.

 

using only one port allows for two-player games.

 

six buttons are too damn many!

 

 

I figured the answer would be along those lines. You don't have to use all six buttons, though. You would just have the option of using up to six. I am sure many homebrewers would've loved to have been able to use more than one button. I see that your designs would have 3 buttons as well, but if you want this thing to be a truly user friendly thing to build at home, your ideas are going to be way over the heads of the vast majority of the people out there. It may seem easy to you guys, but reading a thread like this gives most people a headache. Using a 2 port scheme would be much more straight forward and could be built without even having to hack up any controllers.

 

Although I think it is a great idea, I just don't think that more than a handful of tech-savvy people would even attempt to make it. I could be wrong though. You definitely have a good point about the 2-player games.

 

If this becomes a standard, and hombrewers code for it, then you will see some enterprising person make and sell them. Maybe even the authors themselves. There is always someone out there who will build something for someone.

 

The only controller being hacked up is a driving controller for the encoder, but the spinner may not even become a part of this. maybe it will just be a joystick with three buttons.

I wouldn't describe the proposed controller, from an electronics perspective to require any real tech-savvy. It's far more of a mechanical challenge. There are no fiddly electronics, just wiring.

 

Granted, I have more electronics background than many of the people I know so I may be off base. But I wonder if the main issue here is one of presentation. If the design were also presented in a more pictorial manner rather than just the techie symbolic schematic, it might be less intimidating. Just don't ask me to attempt the drawing: that would make the situation worse.

[Zonie]

All of this tech talk is way over my head, but I am wondering why you guys are so set on creating analog controls. Why not use both ports and have a six button controller? That seems like it might be easier for homebrewer's to take advantage of.

 

using only one port allows for two-player games.

 

six buttons are too damn many!

 

 

I figured the answer would be along those lines. You don't have to use all six buttons, though. You would just have the option of using up to six. I am sure many homebrewers would've loved to have been able to use more than one button. I see that your designs would have 3 buttons as well, but if you want this thing to be a truly user friendly thing to build at home, your ideas are going to be way over the heads of the vast majority of the people out there. It may seem easy to you guys, but reading a thread like this gives most people a headache. Using a 2 port scheme would be much more straight forward and could be built without even having to hack up any controllers.

 

Although I think it is a great idea, I just don't think that more than a handful of tech-savvy people would even attempt to make it. I could be wrong though. You definitely have a good point about the 2-player games.

 

If this becomes a standard, and hombrewers code for it, then you will see some enterprising person make and sell them. Maybe even the authors themselves. There is always someone out there who will build something for someone.

 

The only controller being hacked up is a driving controller for the encoder, but the spinner may not even become a part of this. maybe it will just be a joystick with three buttons.

I wouldn't describe the proposed controller, from an electronics perspective to require any real tech-savvy. It's far more of a mechanical challenge. There are no fiddly electronics, just wiring.

 

Granted, I have more electronics background than many of the people I know so I may be off base. But I wonder if the main issue here is one of presentation. If the design were also presented in a more pictorial manner rather than just the techie symbolic schematic, it might be less intimidating. Just don't ask me to attempt the drawing: that would make the situation worse.

Sure, I understand your point. The less technical assembly drawing can come later after the technical details are worked out among the technical people (Coders and Electronics guys). Then a really simple pictorial drawing can be made for people to follow. I'm thinking we make a photo step by step to build the thing with a provided bill of materials complete with source and prices, then pictures of the assembled hardware with wires drawn on and a connection list of some sort like the old radio shack electronics sets. That would be the easiest.

[BigO]

[quote name='Zonie' post='1550278' date='Tue Jul 8, I wouldn't describe the proposed controller, from an electronics perspective to require any real tech-savvy. It's far more of a mechanical challenge. There are no fiddly electronics, just wiring.

 

Granted, I have more electronics background than many of the people I know so I may be off base. But I wonder if the main issue here is one of presentation. If the design were also presented in a more pictorial manner rather than just the techie symbolic schematic, it might be less intimidating. Just don't ask me to attempt the drawing: that would make the situation worse.

Sure, I understand your point. The less technical assembly drawing can come later after the technical details are worked out among the technical people (Coders and Electronics guys). Then a really simple pictorial drawing can be made for people to follow. I'm thinking we make a photo step by step to build the thing with a provided bill of materials complete with source and prices, then pictures of the assembled hardware with wires drawn on and a connection list of some sort like the old radio shack electronics sets. That would be the easiest.

Yeah, I mean not necessarily even assembled. I mean something that would help the non-techie realize how simple your design actually is. By "issue", I was referring to the intimidation that I was sensing in the one individual, not a deficiency in your presentation. I'm betting that horseboy is more than sufficiently intelligent enough to grasp the concept if faced with familiar depictions of the components. As I write this, I realize that doing that with the encoder would be something of a challenge.

 

I hope the idea catches on.

[Zonie]

[quote name='Zonie' post='1550278' date='Tue Jul 8, I wouldn't describe the proposed controller, from an electronics perspective to require any real tech-savvy. It's far more of a mechanical challenge. There are no fiddly electronics, just wiring.

 

Granted, I have more electronics background than many of the people I know so I may be off base. But I wonder if the main issue here is one of presentation. If the design were also presented in a more pictorial manner rather than just the techie symbolic schematic, it might be less intimidating. Just don't ask me to attempt the drawing: that would make the situation worse.

Sure, I understand your point. The less technical assembly drawing can come later after the technical details are worked out among the technical people (Coders and Electronics guys). Then a really simple pictorial drawing can be made for people to follow. I'm thinking we make a photo step by step to build the thing with a provided bill of materials complete with source and prices, then pictures of the assembled hardware with wires drawn on and a connection list of some sort like the old radio shack electronics sets. That would be the easiest.

Yeah, I mean not necessarily even assembled. I mean something that would help the non-techie realize how simple your design actually is. By "issue", I was referring to the intimidation that I was sensing in the one individual, not a deficiency in your presentation. I'm betting that horseboy is more than sufficiently intelligent enough to grasp the concept if faced with familiar depictions of the components. As I write this, I realize that doing that with the encoder would be something of a challenge.

 

I hope the idea catches on.

 

You mean something like this:

[supercat]

You mean something like this:

 

In 1/4 of the encoder positions you'll be shorting the blue and green buttons together, regardless of the switch position.

[BigO]

Zonie, yes, a hybrid-quasi-schematic like that.

 

supercat is right about the shorting issue. I totally missed that. Instead of the spst switch, could you use a dpdt switch to alternately connect the two paddle lines to the buttons or the encoder?

 

 

 

[EDIT]: oh, wait. I see the drawing is different than the schematic so you may have addressed the issue. Will look again when time permits.

Edited July 11, 2008 by BigO

[Zonie]

Zonie, yes, a hybrid-quasi-schematic like that.

 

supercat is right about the shorting issue. I totally missed that. Instead of the spst switch, could you use a dpdt switch to alternately connect the two paddle lines to the buttons or the encoder?

 

 

 

[EDIT]: oh, wait. I see the drawing is different than the schematic so you may have addressed the issue. Will look again when time permits.

No. I missed it too. I didn't realize the encoder did that. Thought it was just an alternating between right and left, but then it still needs a ref to determine which direction . Anyone got a schem of the internals of the encoder? I don't want to pop one apart to see. I will have to tweak the switching.

[supercat]

I didn't realize the encoder did that. Thought it was just an alternating between right and left, but then it still needs a ref to determine which direction . Anyone got a schem of the internals of the encoder? I don't want to pop one apart to see. I will have to tweak the switching.

 

A two-bit rotary encoder, when turned in one direction, will go through the sequence (no connection), (A only), (A+B), (B only). Thus, if you observe where it was before and after it moved one click, you can tell which direction it moved. Contact bounce is only a problem if the encoder moves more than one click during the bounce interval.

 

In some applications, particularly when things are rotating quickly, four-bit encoders are used. Note that one generally cannot simply use two of the outputs from a four-bit encoder as though they were a two-bit encoder, since the output sequences are a little weird. Sometimes even larger encoders are used. I think Omega Race used a 6-bit encoder, and I've seen 8's.

[BigO]

I have a driving controller with an encoder that allows all of the contacts to be visually observed with it in operation. I'll take pictures if you want.

 

To avoid the short, you could use your DPDT switch to select between the buttons and the encoder lines for connection to the "pot lines".

 

(Not sure why your switch is labeled the way it is. For the sake of discussion lets call the commons the "b" terminals.)

 

Connect console pin 5 to 1b, one button to 1a, one encoder line to 1c

Connect console pin 9 to 2b, one button to 2a, one encoder line to 2c

 

The common (+5 from console pin 7) to the 2 buttons and the ground (console pin 8 ) to the encoder should be able to remain connected at all times.

Edited July 13, 2008 by BigO

[BigO]

There are two segmented plates: the visible one and one just like it beneath the phenolic piece that is slightly rotated compared to the more visible one.

 

00

10

11 - here you can see the leading edge of the underside plate making contact (rotating counterclockwise)

01

Edited July 13, 2008 by BigO

[Zonie]

I have a driving controller with an encoder that allows all of the contacts to be visually observed with it in operation. I'll take pictures if you want.

 

To avoid the short, you could use your DPDT switch to select between the buttons and the encoder lines for connection to the "pot lines".

 

(Not sure why your switch is labeled the way it is. For the sake of discussion lets call the commons the "b" terminals.)

 

Connect console pin 5 to 1b, one button to 1a, one encoder line to 1c

Connect console pin 9 to 2b, one button to 2a, one encoder line to 2c

 

The common (+5 from console pin 7) to the 2 buttons and the ground (console pin 8 ) to the encoder should be able to remain connected at all times.

 

C was intended to be the common. I drew the "schematic" in about 5 min and didn't have a chance to check it. Given how the encoder works, then yes, the +5 to the buttons and gnd to the encoder will be wired unswitched and I'll use the DPDT for the right and left signal inputs.

 

Thanks for the photos of the "encoder" which is apparantly nothing more than a shorting type rotary switch without detents.

 

I didn't realize the VCS could or would tolerate the inputs being tied together like that.

 

I think we have the workings of a nice little controller coming to light here. I'm gonna get a sheet of ABS plastic to build this up on, and then we hopefully someone can code a little test program to test it. I can burn the ROM here, But I'm gonna need to buy a PCB from the Atari age store which is currently closed. I'll ping Albert when we are ready.

 

I have changed the "schematic" ( I hate drawing things this way ) and added two side buttons for pinball games. These would be mounted on the vertical side of the box like pinball machines.

 

It's ugly, but here is what I think is what will work.

 

 

 

And the proper schematic.

 

Edited July 14, 2008 by Zonie

[mos6507]

There are a lot of opinions on the ergonomics here, but personally I would want the joystick on the right and everything else on the left.

 

Even the Tron coinop put the spinner on the left.

 

 

Might make sense to mount a Wico stick like the bat handle or the command control on the right where you can get the trigger. Then you'll be able to enable the true Tron control scheme.

Edited July 14, 2008 by mos6507

[Zonie]

There are a lot of opinions on the ergonomics here, but personally I would want the joystick on the right and everything else on the left.

 

Even the Tron coinop put the spinner on the left.

 

 

Might make sense to mount a Wico stick like the bat handle or the command control on the right where you can get the trigger. Then you'll be able to enable the true Tron control scheme.

 

The latest layout is like Tron with the spinner to the left. The drawing is for wiring purposes only. Of course, people can lay it out any way they want. I also intend to use a joystick with the button like the WICO and switch it like the WICO so that the button can be disconnected when not needed as sometimes you don't want to hit it by accident.

[mos6507]

The latest layout is like Tron with the spinner to the left. The drawing is for wiring purposes only. Of course, people can lay it out any way they want. I also intend to use a joystick with the button like the WICO and switch it like the WICO so that the button can be disconnected when not needed as sometimes you don't want to hit it by accident.

 

Very cool. Normally with these sorts of "what if" projects I have a very skeptical attitude but I think this one may be a winner if you can follow through.

[Zonie]

The latest layout is like Tron with the spinner to the left. The drawing is for wiring purposes only. Of course, people can lay it out any way they want. I also intend to use a joystick with the button like the WICO and switch it like the WICO so that the button can be disconnected when not needed as sometimes you don't want to hit it by accident.

 

Very cool. Normally with these sorts of "what if" projects I have a very skeptical attitude but I think this one may be a winner if you can follow through.

 

Not just my follow through, we need to decide collectively on the final design, then get the coders to embrace it, hence the Keep it simple attitude. Sure I added the pinball flippers yesterday, but those are optional and dont change the fundamental interface design, which is what really matters here. I don't plan on producing these, I have no time, but want to share the design with everyone here and hope someone will run with it and produce them. Maybe we can ping the folks at X-Arcade to produce them in China? Not sure the volume is there...

[mos6507]

Some years ago someone made a special homebrew stick for the Vectrex that was pretty successful. Limited edition item but everyone who wanted one got one. So it's doable.

[horseboy]

Some years ago someone made a special homebrew stick for the Vectrex that was pretty successful. Limited edition item but everyone who wanted one got one. So it's doable.

 

 

I have made several custom sticks. Easy as pie. If someone could design some nice artwork for it, it would be simple to do.