why the bad rep?

[RangerG]

I think much of the bad rep stems from two facts: 1) The 5200 was overshadowed completely by the 2600. Everyone remembers the 2600 and it is cemented in people's mind as representative of Atari. 2) Modern retro-gaming has been especially hard on the 5200 because of the controllers. I remember when I got into classic gaming around 9 years ago now and I was excited to research and get a 5200 (which my cousin had and I liked as I kid). There was a lot of information for a newbie and it all seemed to revolve around how bad the controllers were. The 5200 is my favorite system. It had a crappy pack-in game (Super Breakout) compared to a great pack-in (Donkey Kong) for the Colecovision, but the 5200 library as a whole is excellent.

[phuzaxeman]

the 5200 was one the best atari systems ever made. it had many great games (countermeasure, zenji, pengo, baseball, space dungeon etc). anyone that grew up wtih the 5200 when it came out had no problems using the controller unless it was broken. unreliable yes, but the 5200 was my favorite controller when it worked. i never knew it had haters until the internet. i could care less about what people say about the controllers or the system because it is the most played retro game system in my house.

[shadow460]

Problem is, even if the controllers were reliable, they are still very clumsy to use. Atari should have released a digital stick that could be purchased a la carte for the 5200. Games like Frogger, Kangaroo, and Qix simply are not made for full analog control.

 

Even on newer systems, analog control on a stock pad is more of a liability than anything else.

[phuzaxeman]

Problem is, even if the controllers were reliable, they are still very clumsy to use. Atari should have released a digital stick that could be purchased a la carte for the 5200. Games like Frogger, Kangaroo, and Qix simply are not made for full analog control.

 

Even on newer systems, analog control on a stock pad is more of a liability than anything else.

frogger can be used on the keypad. kangaroo and qix seem fine for me. i can see a person that didn't own the system back in the day having trouble but i had a group of kids (8-10) all having the 5200 and we never talked about how hard the controllers were to use. breakdown of the controllers was a different story.

[jetset]

Problem is, even if the controllers were reliable, they are still very clumsy to use. Atari should have released a digital stick that could be purchased a la carte for the 5200. Games like Frogger, Kangaroo, and Qix simply are not made for full analog control.

 

Even on newer systems, analog control on a stock pad is more of a liability than anything else.

frogger can be used on the keypad. kangaroo and qix seem fine for me. i can see a person that didn't own the system back in the day having trouble but i had a group of kids (8-10) all having the 5200 and we never talked about how hard the controllers were to use. breakdown of the controllers was a different story.

 

 

It's just a hater thing for the most part. None of the people I knew who had one back in the day had any problems, other than the fire buttons wearing out. The internet created the "wauuuugh, they don't self center" problem as far as I'm concerned. I will agree though Frogger is one that takes a LOT of practice. Kangaroo and Qix? Never had a problem with either of those. And, not to re-drag another CV vs 5200 argument here, but there are just as many games on each system where the controllers shine as suck. Look at Centipede and Defender. The 5200 controllers were absolutely MADE for those games. But just try playing them for more than 10 minutes on the CV. The control is decent enough but after a few minutes you start getting some SERIOUS cramping. Playable yes? Fun? No. No way. On the flip side...Frogger and Beamrider. The CV controllers are perfectly suited there. Short, precise stop and go movements. Make a move a teeny bit too much you're dead. Unless you can be that precise with the 5200 controllers those games are playable but not a helluva lot of fun.

All in all the bad rep was created by the web. ANY bad rep back in the day was from the gaming mags who gave the 5200 at best a close to equal comparison to the CV. Most of them though HATED the big, bad, Atari. I even remember some of them giving the edge to the CV in GRAPHICS. HUH???

Back in the day the 5200 was THE arcade machine and the elite gaming system. Everything else was just a toy.

[shadow460]

See I actually had access to a 5200 when I was growing up, and later on, we got two of them. I also knew that the boots were the only thing even remotely close to self centering. I still hate the controls, though.

 

To put it into perspective, I switched from one port of Qix to another. I know about how good I can play each. My performance on the 5200 port was sub par, but my performance on the other was actually above what I can normally achieve. That tells me--it's the controller (or the system, but I doubt that). It's not that it doesn't self center--it simply does not respond to sideways movements. I guess Qix's dead zone is larger than what I expected.

 

I did know know until recently that Frogger could be played with the keyboard. And eve though Kangaroo isn't that much of a problem for me, I think it would be much better with a digital stick. Pac-Man, for me, is unplayable with the 5200 stick. I recently got Mario Bros and had some difficulty with that, but I didn't play it long enough to say that it does or does not work well with the stick.

 

I can see that my opinion might not be popular here. The reasons I don't like the 5200 are because I think it is unreliable and I think the controls are very poorly designed. Even back in the day with Megamania and Bounty Bob, I still hated the controls. I loved the games and I still enjoy them now, don't get me wrong, and I still like seeing the improved graphics over some of the 2600 titles like Kangaroo and Pac-Man. Other titles, like Qix, get totally owned by ports on other systems.

 

I dunno, man. Maybe this is one system where I should just use emulation and say forget the hardware.

 

I emailed Best late yesterday and asked what their absolute best rebuilt 5200 controller is that was originally made by Atari. I hear they are night and day different, and maybe having a good controller, along with ditching the switchbox, will change my opinion. When I get that controller, I'm going to dig in to my stack of 5200 games and start playing, I do know that.

 

Oh, and for what it's worth, I'm no fan of Coleco, either.

Edited July 26, 2009 by shadow460

[BydoEmpire]

I emailed Best late yesterday and asked what their absolute best rebuilt 5200 controller is that was originally made by Atari. I hear they are night and day different, and maybe having a good controller, along with ditching the switchbox, will change my opinion. When I get that controller, I'm going to dig in to my stack of 5200 games and start playing, I do know that.

For what it's worth, I picked up a Best Electronics rebuilt 5200 controller shortly after getting a 5200 system a few years ago and I've had very few problems controlling games - including Qix, Pac Man, Miner 2049er, Keystone Kapers, etc. That's probably why I have such a high regard for the 5200.

 

I think the bad rap is mostly due to reliability. The non-centering stick only causes problems in a handful of poorly-programmed games, imho, but the having them break frequently would definitely turn people off. I've had to adjust the centering pot in my console a couple of times over the years to get the stick centered properly, but there's no way I would have known to do that in 1983 - I would have though it was "just broken" or something.

 

The 5200 also didn't have the quantity of original and must-buy games that other systems had, which didn't help its legacy. Many of the best games for it were available elsewhere, even if in a lesser port. The price was a little high, and I wonder if people didn't think Atari was screwing them to some extent, trying to sell them Breakout, Pac Man and Missile Command all over again. I didn't have one back in the day (just 2600 and Inty) so that's the pure speculation part of my post.

 

That said, the 5200 has been my most-played classic system over the last few years. I love it.

[BydoEmpire]

See, the Epyx 500XJ I always hear people saying is a horrible controller that gives them hand cramps, but it's one of my favorites too, just like the 5200 controller is. I'm beginning to think I'm just strange, or have deformed hands or something.

Who doesn't like the 500XJ? It's such a comfortable and accurate controller - personally I love the clicks. It helps reinforce that your motions are correct. Definitely one of my favorites.

[jetset]

Oh, and for what it's worth, I'm no fan of Coleco, either.

 

Why? It's a great system too! I always did and will prefer the 5200 myself, but the CV is no slouch. They both suffer from imperfections in some areas and are arcade perfect in others.

Of course in the CV v 5200 'war', you'll rarely see a 5200 fan(boy) outright shitting on the CV. t least thats what I've observed. The CV camp on the other hand...well, just read some of the posts. "Inferior", and "garbage"....One troll even had a line in his sig saying the 5200 was a piece of shit. On an ATARI website!

Real nice.

 

You should have both in your collection if possible, and for the games (on both systems) that are difficult because of the controllers - Pac-Man is a good example for both systems...(a loose wobbly controller for one and a stubby tree stump on the other)...a little practice goes a long way.

[kool kitty89]

The "why not get an Atari 800" argument is a fine one I suppose, although I don't remember there being a huge market for them back in the 80's, and honestly I didn't know they were the same price (they were right? otherwise if the 400/800 were much more $$ that argument goes down the crapper) either. Still since so many games for the current generation (360, PS3, Wii) are available in a PC version, would it stand to reason I should buy a pc instead in today's age?

Actually, both the 400 and 800 (especially the 800) were more expensive than the 5200. Well, the 400 eventually went down in price significantly, but the 800 was always more expensive than the 5200. The 1200XL, which appeared at around the same time as the 5200, was even more expensive than the 5200 ($899!).

 

I don't think the 400/800 saw anywhere near the marketing push by Warner as the 2600 had, and afik there really wasn't a push for the 8-bitters as gaming machines, despite the 400 originally being intended for this as well as the line being adapted from plans for a follow on to the 2600. (probably as it could have cut in on the 2600's market)

 

The 1200XL was a bigger mistake than the 5200, expensive (probably the biggest point), still rather bulky, and not fully compatible with the 400/800. The 600 and 800XL would have been great around the time, much better replacements for the 400/800 and better competition to the C64 than the 1200XL. (in terms of cost and form factor) Had this happened, may have even been good to push the 600XL as a game system and not release the 5200 at all. (probably release a 2600 adaptor to match Coleco as well)

However, with the 8-bit line there's still the problem that the 2600 has with no lockout control to regulated 3rd parties or piracy, and more importantly, make mone off of licencing deals with 3rd parties. (allowing the pric of the base hardware to be cut as well)

 

So in terms of a console, they still would probably be looking for something different, and out of the box compatibility would have been a major point, along with low cost. (something like the 7800 would have been great, even if it meant waiting a bit longer, like mid-late 1983) Not necessarily identical to the 7800, there's a number of different routs that could have been taken (including directly building off the 2600 hardware, possibly in a similar way to the 8-bit architecture, but keeping 2600 compatibility)

It's fairly clear that compatibility was already a significant consideration before the 5200 was developed, with the cancelled 3200 design sporting it. From a cost stand point, it's not just the production costs, but also higher distibution costs due to the high weight and bulk of the 5200. (had it been more like the 5200 Jr./5100, it could have been better in this respect, but still fairly large)

 

With mounting competition from Mattel, and the Colecovision looming, Atari rushed for a quick fix after the failure of the 3200 (I beleive planned for a 1981 release), and they ended up with the 5200, with its flaws. They probably could have gone a similr route using the A8-bit architecture to expideate development, but strongly focused on keeping costs down (small a board as possible, same for casing, probably 8kB rather than 16, only 2 controller ports), and included 2600 hardware (TIA and RIOT) onboard for compatibility plus added sound from TIA.

You could even have analog joystics (using the paddle lines as the 5200 did) without changing the connector, though you wouldn't have the keypad, you could still have up to 5 buttons. (fire button plus 4 joystick switches from the 2600)

Though such a system may still be fairly expensive to produce (consolidationg chips, at least later on, could help though), if they could get it down to $200 or below it would have been nice.

Of course this also ignires the internal problems at Atari at this time. (which didn't start to improve until Morgan was in charge, with Tramiel taking over thereafter, Morgan's efforts never really got to show) However, had the 5200 had a better launch, and the crash been avoided, or at least postponed, perhaps Morgan would have had time to correct things before they collapsed. (or at leased lessened problems and cushioned the crash)

Having something more like the 7800 (particularly cost wise), would have been even better in this case though.

 

One thing that any backwards compatible machine should have done, however, would have been to make the new system's carts look significantly different and, preferably, not even fit into the older console, and make it very clear in advertizing that it's a new system that will work with your old games. (no confusion like with the 7800, especially 2600 games that said "for use with 2600 or 7800")

 

I think the long throw of the 5200 stick combined with the lack of self centering made it problematic for use in 8-way digital controll situations, the Vectrex doesn't seem to get the same criticism and it had an analog joy/thumbstick. Quality also comes into play though as, even if not actually broken, they joysticks seem to often become "jittery" (though this could be related to centering as well), relaibility problems with the fire buttons seem to be an even bigger problem though. (on a related note I think a single fire button on either side like CV or 7800, would have been better) Making the controllers slightly smaller in general and easier to hold would have been better as well. (I beleive the revised, self centering controller was like this, but never released)

 

Also, if you did go with a digital stick, you could still add 2 more butons (via the pot lines), or use the pot lines in a 2-axis joystick fassion but with 4 buttons (2 on each axis/pot line) sending fixed voltage signals trough the pot lines, and then you could have up to 5 action buttons like with an analog stick. -using multiple, fixed, voltages on pot lines for additional action buttons would be problematic as it wouldn't wotk if you pushed both buttons simultaneously that share a single pot line, while this wouldn't be an issue for a joystick as you can only activate one (up, dn, L, R) or 2 switches (diagonal) simultaneously, and you'd have the fixed voltage switches arranged in axes similar to actual potentiometers. (up+dn sharing one line, L+R sharing the other, so there's never crossover)

 

Ideally you could even have a controller set-up with switchable analog and digital modes, using a layout similar to the fixed voltage layout I mentioned above, but switchable to actual potentiometers as well. Have a short throw, self centering, analog joystick with 4 buttons/contacts arranged to also get pushed like a conventional digital joystick (with fixed voltages close to full up/dn/L/R on the pots), with a switch to choose the mode. (thus both modes are automatically compatible with all games, tough you wouldn't want to use dgital mode on games catering to track-ball/2-axis speed-sensitive analog controlls, and it wouldn't be useable at all for position sensitive games, like breakout)

 

 

As to the technical/design side of things mentioned above, a lot of that was recently discussed in these threads: http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=146992

http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?s...47026&st=25 (particularly this one, starting on page 2)

Edited July 29, 2009 by kool kitty89

[phuzaxeman]

The "why not get an Atari 800" argument is a fine one I suppose, although I don't remember there being a huge market for them back in the 80's, and honestly I didn't know they were the same price (they were right? otherwise if the 400/800 were much more $$ that argument goes down the crapper) either. Still since so many games for the current generation (360, PS3, Wii) are available in a PC version, would it stand to reason I should buy a pc instead in today's age?

Actually, both the 400 and 800 (especially the 800) were more expensive than the 5200. Well, the 400 eventually went down in price significantly, but the 800 was always more expensive than the 5200. The 1200XL, which appeared at around the same time as the 5200, was even more expensive than the 5200 ($899!).

 

 

...The 1200XL was a bigger mistake than the 5200, expensive (probably the biggest point), still rather bulky, and not fully compatible with the 400/800....

 

 

 

....I think the long throw of the 5200 stick combined with the lack of self centering made it problematic for use in 8-way digital controll situations, the Vectrex doesn't seem to get the same criticism and it had an analog joy/thumbstick.....

 

 

 

 

 

As to the technical/design side of things mentioned above, a lot of that was recently discussed in these threads: http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=146992

http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?s...47026&st=25 (particularly this one, starting on page 2)

 

you are in the minority if you think the 5200 was a mistake....while there are issues with the joystick, the 5200 is one of the few game systems that has a lot of good games (better ratio than jaguar, 7800, and arguably the 2600). the 5200 concept per se was advanced during the time (i.e., pause controllers with analog sticks, dual stick coupler, best trackball during the time for centipede and missle command, voice with xtra hardware, etc). while the 5200 had flaws, the other systems did too. there were way more issues with atari rather than the 5200 itself.

 

while the vectrex was unique, it's games werent as diverse/complex as the 5200. so the comparison is apples to oranges. you're not going to pull of space dungeon or contermeasure on a vectrex joystick setup let alone a 1 on 1 competion. i see your analog point for the comparison though.

 

if atari had packaged a better game, a more reliable joystick, and automatically was backward compatible to the 2600, it would have sold much more and lasted longer. there were alot of people, and the company itself, that stayed with their 2600. during it's time, the ps1 was one of the best consoles of all time. when the ps2 came out, one of the few backward compatible systems, it became the biggest console ever in terms of sales. i think the atari 5200 would have benefited if it would have done the same.

[kool kitty89]

By mistake I mean with overall marketing and the situation of the time, along with the technical side of things. Atari just wasn't willing to shift interest away from the 2600, and the way they handled the 5200 didn't help either. I'll say the internal problems at Atari were a lot bigger than the 5200 itsself. (and many of the problems with the 5200 were directly related to these)

Lack of control over 2600 games was a big part (both from a quality controll standpoint and royaltees/licencing) should have been major motivation to switch over a new cosole. (but does the 5200 even feature some form of lockout? I know the 7800 does, but if the 5200 didn't that wouldn't really help thing in this case)

 

Along with the controllers and compatibility, I think keeping cost low would have been very important, I don't know if this could have been done with the existing 5200 hardware with a RIOT+TIA tacked on. (looking at shots of the 5200 board, it had omponents pretty spread out, so perhaps they could have arranged things to be much more compact, even with a couple added chips) Cutting back to 8 kB could have cut a little cost too, and still the same amount of RAM as a stock 400. Though, with royaltees and licencing agreements from 3rd parties they could probably afford to sell it at cost. (which became the norm much later)

 

I do think it's a cool system though, and considdering the short period they had to get it out after the 3200 was dropped, using the 8-bitter architecture was rather logical. (going specifically for a new system though could ahve been better overall, more capable and cost effective, but probably not available nearly as soon)

 

 

Problems with the 7800 and Jaguar are rather seperate, both under Tramiel who wasn't particularly interested in selling games or pushing advertizing. (note that when he finally decided to launch the 7800, it probably was unrelated to the NES's launch, the 2600 Jr. was released before the NES even test marketed) Still, who knows how the 7800 (and Atari) would have done from '84 onward, under Morgan.

 

In any case (games aside), are there any figures available on the 5200's actual sales? THe 7800 sold surprizingly well given the circumstances, >3.7 million based on Curt Vendel's recent figures.

 

 

 

Another noted problem (that continued to some degree to the 7800), is releasing many of the same games that are on the 2600 already, granted, thet're on the 400/800 already and natural to port over to the 5200, but they could have been more selective about which ones to bring over. (Pac Man, definitely, some others like Missile command, definitely -especially with a good analog controller, but the 8-bt/5200 version of Space invaders was kind of lackluster and lacking in some of the features of the 2600 version, for one -and particularly unnecessary on a proposed backwards compatible console) Port over games that were done poorly on the 2600, or good on the 2600, but exceptionally well on the 8-bit line. (or well on the 8-bitters, but even better with analog controlls)

Of course, the opposite situation could occur, with a major title not yet being on the 2600, being ported to both (or to the newer one first, then the older) this has happened with newer systems too, the Master System is a big example (at least in Europe).

And Halo 2 for 360 was pretty much the exact same thing as many exaples on the 5200.

[carmel_andrews]

Perhaps the big A should have released a adapter so you could use standard atari joysticks (bk when 5200 was still in production)

[ninermaniac]

Well, systems got slimmed down and this was a beast. A sexy beast indeed but the controllers didn't, IMO, cause any sales to drop. I believe that many people had so much 2600 stuff that there was no use in buying a 5200.

[Zoyx]

Late to the party on this thread... so what I have to say won't add much.

 

Controllers - should of been self-centering, and more robust.

Console was too big - should of been a 5200 slim or junior.

RF controller - The 1st gen lame "innovation" of making you plug the AC adapter into the RF adapter was a head-scratcher.

Backward compatibility - Playing 2600 games and using its controllers for both 2600 and 5200 games out of the gate, would of been nice.

 

I make the argument that the 5200 should of just been a 400 without the keyboard and expansion port... maybe just a num pad. Then just concentrate on building on the atari 8-bit game library.

 

Has someone done an easy to do mod to the controllers so they self-center?

[bohoki]

Late to the party on this thread... so what I have to say won't add much.

 

Controllers - should of been self-centering, and more robust.

Console was too big - should of been a 5200 slim or junior.

RF controller - The 1st gen lame "innovation" of making you plug the AC adapter into the RF adapter was a head-scratcher.

Backward compatibility - Playing 2600 games and using its controllers for both 2600 and 5200 games out of the gate, would of been nice.

 

I make the argument that the 5200 should of just been a 400 without the keyboard and expansion port... maybe just a num pad. Then just concentrate on building on the atari 8-bit game library.

 

Has someone done an easy to do mod to the controllers so they self-center?

 

 

controllers could only be self centering if they had pot trimmers since every system has a different exact center atari got away with it by having the joystick user find their own center often just a few millimerters one way or another

try that with a wico on different systems plug in choplifter center it on one system and the next you will notice a little left drift or right the carbon dot buttons were a nightmare buyt they often lasted their warrany period

 

console too big (the first generation ones were full inside the back trap door for controller storage was a lame idea since you had to wrap the wire around the stick so tight to make it fit it puts undue strain on the cable

but the motivation was understood with the one wire rf switchbox scheme

 

they wanted you to keep the console on the coffee table with only one wire going to the system the intent was that you would play press pause and hit the bypass switch on the rf adapter to allow someone to watch tv for a while but marketing and designers disnt exactly have a meeting of the minds since you would have to reach behind your tv to hit the switch one wire to the system and an automatic switchover was very innovative but caused more trouble

 

it is quite stylish in fact it kind of looks like a photo album sitting on a coffee table when fully stowed

 

backwards compatablility the first generation unit was pretty full inside already in 1982 technology was not cheap and as compact as today from our point of view with multilayer circuit boards and surface mounted parts were unheard of then everything had to be soldered through a hole so that the component would hold "forever" unlike today where things overheat and tiny surfacemount parts that were baked on with solder paste often will release or crack free

 

the 5200 felt like and probably was an experimental system that "escaped" and with the controller it would only be able to be used with the 2600 paddle games and i doubt many would enjoy plying games on the keypad 2,4,6,8 with those crummy carbon dots

 

although backwards compatability would have defintaly made it more popular i have the later adapter but it doesnt work with my 4 port unit and my 2 port unit died(yet still works with the 2600 adapter)

[jeremysart]

The controllers are such a personal issue... people either love them or hate them. I love them, and I firmly believe that a lot more people would like them if they gave them time to get used to them (still some people won't like them, that's fine). They were poorly constructed from a reliability standpoint, but there are modern solutions to fix all that. I think it's a fantastic system and can hold its own with any other console of the era.

 

Haha, I feel the same way about the Intv controllers.

 

The 5200 is a good system. Most of the negatives are the size, and joystick failure. But those are easily overlooked by the systems great games and graphics.

[Paranoid]

I consider myself the high priest of the Temple of the 5200 here at Atari Age. There are a few of us here. And there are a lot of options.

 

I have a Best gold dot refurbished 5200 joystick. Very nice, but expensive.

 

I've rebuilt my own controllers using Best's circuit cards with the original carbon dot pads, and they require occasional maintenance, (drag the carbon pads along an index card to clean them).

 

I've also got the 5200 to 7200 adapter. I can't even remember what it is called anymore, but they used to be sold here at Atari Age. I think I got one of the last batches. Redemption. That is what it was called.

 

Finally, there are schematics here for turning a digital microleaf stick (the RSI Space Invaders TV plug in game was the stick used) into a stick for the 5200. I've built one of those too.

 

Some of the problems with the 5200 stick are actually built into the console itself. Because we're dealing with analog, the tolerances from one console to another might be a little different or "out of whack" and that can make getting the resistance on a home brew digital stick a little frustrating.

 

With all of that said, it seems like ALL of the games have been ported to the Atari 8 bit computer - and for the most part, they play just as well there as on the 5200 - and in some cases, there are 8 bit versions of games that are superior to the 5200 versions that were released, anyhow. There are some exceptions, as pointed out, where the analog controllers really add to the 5200 version of the game.

 

Space Dungeon and Robotron are both great 5200 games that simply do not translate well to other platforms. They're executed almost flawlessly in the 5200 environment, using the 5200 controllers. Centipede and Galaxian are also titles that showcase the 5200 analog controller. Another title, that is perhaps my favorite 5200 title, that really has no very good port is Countermeasure. It isn't a stellar game in itself, but the concept, graphics, and execution makes it a 5200 classic. I think it is ripe for an improved "what we've learned" homebrew version or even a PC version or other modern interpretation. Maybe the thing about Countermeasure is that it captures such a "Cold War" atmosphere on what is essentially a "cold war" console.

 

Finally, as for modern gaming and analog sticks, I'd like to see Halo be such a big hit on a console with only digital controls. Driving games also benefit, so GTA, Gran Tourismo, Gotham City and other favorites seem unlikely to be successful. All the way back to the PS1, at least, we can see where analog nubs benefit game diversity. Fact is, in many ways, the 5200 was ahead of the curve, and suffered for that. I suppose the important distinction is that modern analog sticks are self centering. But the 5200 is absolutely the first step toward analog controllers in commercially marketed console gaming. (You could argue that the original Apples had analog joysticks before even the PC... and you would be right, but I'd argue that early Apple analog sticks truly did suck... unless you were playing Oregon Trail waiting for 5th period at your Jr. High.)