Early game emulation

[sut]

Further to my previous topic: http://www.atariage.com/forums/topic/168844-missile-simulator-game-odyemu-possible/.

 

I'm looking at going upto 1971 if possible here's the games and my queries if anyone could help

 

1947 - Missile Simulator Game

Already queried on the above thread, no simulator available.

 

1950/52/53 - Chess Playing Algorithm - By Alan Turing and D.G. Champernowne

- TUROCHAMP - By Dr. Dietrich Prinz

- Original Chess Playing Program for the Manchester Ferranti Computer - By Dr. Dietrich Prinz

- Checkers-Playing Program for the IBM 701 - By Arthur Samuel

 

What i'm thinking here is after I did a google search I found this "Has anyone programmed a UCI or Winboard engine based on Alan Turing's Paper Machine? Being the first ever chess engine I'm interested in how does it play." at http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=16614.

The guy didn't really get an answer but whereas I don't expect emulation on the first 2 as they never got to run on a system, has someone used these chess engines on something like winboard ? The 3rd and 4th titles I suppose emulation is possible ? but again possibly on something like Winboard ?

By the way I can't play chess and i'm not into computer chess but would like to sample the above games for historical purposes.

 

1951 - NIM for the NIMROD computer, emulator/simulator available here http://www.goodeveca.net/nimrod/

Unfortunately the program is for BeOS only, i've emailed the author and he's no fan of Windows and will not be porting the program.

 

1952 - OXO for the EDSAC computer, emulator/simulator available here: http://www.dcs.warwick.ac.uk/~edsac/

 

1958 - Tennis For Two, emulator/simulator available here: http://www.gamersquarter.com/tennisfortwo/ (Thanks to njb12287 for the link)

 

1959 - Mouse in the Maze & Tic-Tac-Toe for the TX-0

 

MESS Emulates the TX-0, I appear to have found the games files (if that's what you can call them) here http://www.bitsavers.org/bits/MIT/tx-0/mouse/

and here http://www.bitsavers.org/bits/MIT/tx-0/tic-tac-toe/ . However I cannot get them to run on MESS any suggestions ?

 

1962 - Spacewar! emulator/simulator available here: http://spacewar.oversigma.com/ (Thanks to njb12287 for the link)

 

1969 - Space Travel - by Ken Thompson

 

Really surprised at this, historically this seems a major milestone as it lead to the UNIX system, but I cannot find any emulator/simulator for it anywhere not even a screenshot of the game ? Would have thought this would have been ported to other systems and definitely would expect to be able play a version of it.

 

1971 - Galaxy Game - Coin-op version of Spacewar! presume absolutely no difference to Spacewar ?

 

Apologies for the long list, but once I've got to the bottom of this i'm upto the Odyssey where hopefully things will be more straight forward !

Edited September 30, 2010 by sut

[ComputerSpaceFan]

Apparently at the Stanford University website there is a simulation of Galaxy Game. I just found out about this today. I'm going to try it out. If it works, I'm going to add it to the many simulators I have listed on my website (and absolutely feel free to add the Computer Space simulator from my site in your list sut).

[ComputerSpaceFan]

Bugger, it says the page cannot be displayed. I sure it's just down temporarily.

[sut]

Nice site, Computer Space will definitely be on my to play list !

Good page with the simulators, let's hope the page with the Galaxy Game simulator is up again soon so we can see if there were any minor differences, perhaps an insert coin screen ?

[sut]

Ok I think I'm going to need to scale back my ambitions on this.

I believe the way forward is to play home versions on the early systems. I know the channel f has a version of nim and mouse maze and no doubt the atari vcs has too. Regarding chess I'll try and find the best chess game on a early home computer ( suggestions ?).

So does anyone know of a home conversion of space teavel

[sut]

http://www.mameworld.info/ubbthreads/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=227039&page=&view=&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1

 

Just stumbled upon this, perhaps we might get to play Galaxy Game after all ?

 

Plus still cannot get Mouse in the Maze & Tic-Tac-Toe to run on the TX-0 in MESS, I've renamed the files to .rim but still no joy (files attached).

 

But the Galaxy Game development is definitely encouraging.

Mouse & Tic Tac Toe.zip

Edited October 28, 2010 by sut

[sut]

 

Also found this, tbh need to go to bed now as i've got work tomorrow

 

But this may be the green shoots of a possible simulation for Missile Simulator Game / Cathode Ray Tube Amusement Device.

 

See what you guys think, will catch up with you tomorrow.

 

Wow this guy has been busy, here's his entry on Mouse in the Maze & Tic-Tac-Toe

 

 

Also on the early chess programs

 

 

So a couple of developments on this topic since I last posted, perhaps I gave up too easily !

Definitely off to bed now lol, hopefully something may crop up regarding Space Travel as well.

Edited October 28, 2010 by sut

[Retro Rogue]

 

Also found this, tbh need to go to bed now as i've got work tomorrow

 

But this may be the green shoots of a possible simulation for Missile Simulator Game / Cathode Ray Tube Amusement Device.

 

See what you guys think, will catch up with you tomorrow.

 

That's just a simulation of how a CRT works in general, not anything specific to the Missile game. And his broken english description is missguided in points per our previous discussion.

[sut]

http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/people/mcintyre/applets/cathoderaytube/crt.html

 

I was refering more to this link, can now really visualise what it may have looked/played like (stick an overlay on it and you will see).

 

But as we discussed earlier it's far more closely related to mechanical games than video/computer games.

Edited October 31, 2010 by sut

[sut]

After careful consideration I have reached the conclusion that Spacewar! in it's various guises (Spacewar!, Galaxy Game & Computer Space) is the true first video game! This is purely my opinion and i'm sure many will argue and disagree.

 

Let me explain my conclusion with a couple of analogies: If the inventor of the record, decided to record his voice on a record or perhaps sing a little ditty onto a record - is this the first record ? No-ones heard it, it's not designed for people to hear it and it's never going to be released for general consumption it is in fact just a sample of what can be done. The inventor of the video camera if he waves into his prototype camera and films is, is this the worlds first film ?

 

The point i am making is that the games I have listed above from various internet sources are either 'tech' demo's or examples what can be done with the then new computer technology. The games were designed to show what computers are capable of and were generally pet projects.

 

This is where Spacewar! leaves the others trailing, the game was designed to be added to by other programmers and was also accessable to other students (therefore opening it up for public consumption) the game then evolved into Galaxy Game moving the game into the commercial arena (albeit restricted).

Finally it becomes Computer Space which is designed to sell, to be played by the general public and also meets the raster display criteria that people like to attach to video games.

 

So there is my reasoning. Spacewar! is the grandaddy of video games, Ralph Baers 'Chase Game' is nothing more then a demo. Spacewar! is were it all began people! Forget Tennis for Two, Never mind Tic-Tac-Toe these are isolated experiments and projects from their creators.

 

Spacewar!, Pong and the Magnavox Odyssey are the founding fathers of video games.

[almightytodd]

While the argument in favor of Spacewar! certainly has merit, I think it's more complicated than that. The problem as I see it, is in the differentiation between a "computer game" that plays using a programmable CPU paired with a raster video screen, and a pure "video game" that uses discreet electronic circuitry to convert voltage inputs from analog devices into corresponding movements of objects on a video display. Technology pioneers such as Baer, Bushnell, and Dabney are left out of the story if you ignore the 16 years between 1961 when Spacewar! was programmed for the PDP-1, and 1977 when microprocessors such as the Zilog Z80 and the MOS 6502 made CPU-based arcade and home videogame systems practical. I think the Wikipedia article on the topic of "First video game" does a pretty good job of listing the various relevent events, and leaving it up to the reader to decide which constitutes the "first".

[sut]

I think the Wikipedia article on the topic of "First video game" does a pretty good job of listing the various relevent events, and leaving it up to the reader to decide which constitutes the "first"

 

Agreed Pong Story is a good site also if you can get by the authors obsession with giving Ralph Baer all the credit.

[Retro Rogue]

Agreed Pong Story is a good site also if you can get by the authors obsession with giving Ralph Baer all the credit.

 

 

All the credit? There were no video games before Ralph and company and their first patents of the inudstry. Show me the video in a PDP vector display. Once again, the "video" in "video game" is there for a reason. There were certainly computer games and games that used a CRT or other displays. But even just limiting it to computer games as you're trying to subtext "video game", as a computer game Spacewar wasn't even the first of that. I'm sorry, but it's completely unprofessional to mix and match and cut definitions as you see fit, and ignore entire swatches of history as Todd pointed out. I was one of the main contributors of the First Video Game article at Wikipedia, and there's a reason we specifically stated "events and earlier technology" vs. earlier video games. Ralph and company were the first to hook up an electronic device for playing games through a video signal, and the first to access a display not thought accessible to outside devices (the television) for the purpose of playing a game via it's video signal, the first to generate and display objects through said video signal, and the first to make such video generated objects interactive with the player, let alone interactive for the purpose of a game. And he and his team were the first to file patents for said technology, and successfully defend said patents over 25 years repeatedly - demonstrating uncoditionally there was no earlier example of the technology since that's what was required. Pretty simple.

 

And the logic of if the first record was the first record because nobody heard it commercially is way way out there. The first record is the first record, the first one in existence. And yes, the first video recording is the first video recording. All well documented actually, and again there's a reason why they're honored as such. And you're completely incorrect about Spacewar! and contradicting your own reasoning, the game was designed by some hackers for their own personal use at MIT. It grew out of a group of kids creating, modding and expanding their code together - you're confusing the development process vs. "designed to be added to" and "available for public consumption". It was on paper tape in a drawer where the single PDP-1 was located that the group coded on late at night. The only reason it spread beyond the small group of friends coding it was because DEC (who had provided the PDP-1 as MIT graduates themselves) decided to take it and use it as the resident test program for shipping their PDP's in the early days. If a customer set it up and it booted up Spacewar!, then they knew everything arrived in working order. All which leads me to believe you're not familiar with the group of people in particular and how they fit in to "hackerdom". I'd suggest Steven Levy's book for a start, and some serious reasearch for a finish.

 

You're entitled to your own opinion, however you are not entitled to your own facts.

Edited November 14, 2010 by wgungfu

[Tursi]

Show me the video in a PDP vector display. Once again, the "video" in "video game" is there for a reason. There were certainly computer games and games that used a CRT or other displays.

 

Perhaps I'm missing something, but are you trying to say that a vector monitor disqualifies a game from being a video game? That leaves out arcade classics like Battlezone, Tempest, Star Wars, Star Trek, as well as the entire Vectrex home system, that were classified as video games long before Wikipedia articles came into being.

 

I may be confused, but claiming that a raster scan CRT is necessary to define something as a video game defies more than thirty years of history, and sounds like a retcon to me.

[sut]

All the credit? There were no video games before Ralph and company and their first patents of the inudstry.

 

Not disputing, but I would argue Nolan Bushnell did just as much for the industry, he may not have come up with the technology but he was the one who put it into the mainstream. Hence my remark about giving Ralph all the credit, would video games be as big today if left to Ralph and Sanders/Magnavox, and Nolan never got involved ? Why is Nolan barely mentioned in Pong Story ? Have you read the dismissive article on Tennis For Two ? The point I was making is the author is focused entirely on Ralph and dismissive of any other contributing factors to the birth of the industry.

 

the first video recording is the first video recording

 

What I was trying to say, although obviously not clearly, was the first video recording does not make it the first film it was the first step to producing a film. Was the first person to kick a ball the inventor of soccer ? or was it the guy who developed the idea ? What I was attempting to demonstrate is OXO, NIM et al are the first steps.

 

All which leads me to believe you're not familiar with the group of people in particular and how they fit in to "hackerdom". I'd suggest Steven Levy's book for a start, and some serious reasearch for a finish.

 

I'm not familar with "hackerdom" this is something I have been researching in my spare time (which having a full time job and being the father of two girls is limited) for around a month and the opinions are what i've formulated upto yet. I'm not adverse to changing my opinions but my purpose when I began this was to see where my hobby originated from.

 

I am finding these venonmous defining and catagorising of video games surprising, and perhaps you need to be a little more understanding that the wider public see no difference between a video game and a computer game, before I started this I had no idea that the type of display device you played a game on made such a difference. And sometimes the wider view is not the same as the academic's view.

 

You're entitled to your own opinion, however you are not entitled to your own facts.

 

Quite right on both counts, It was not my intention to distort the facts just the point out what i felt Spacewar! was the main catalyst for the industry rightly or wrongly that is my current view.

Edited November 14, 2010 by sut

[Retro Rogue]

Perhaps I'm missing something, but are you trying to say that a vector monitor disqualifies a game from being a video game? That leaves out arcade classics like Battlezone, Tempest, Star Wars, Star Trek, as well as the entire Vectrex home system, that were classified as video games long before Wikipedia articles came into being.

 

I may be confused, but claiming that a raster scan CRT is necessary to define something as a video game defies more than thirty years of history, and sounds like a retcon to me.

 

Actually it's the opposite - that the popular culture reappropriation and subsequent application in hindsite is defying more than thirty years of actual history and is itself retcon. And the topic has been more than well hashed out in these forums if you want a full technical explination without me having to rewrite it here. The video in video game is there for a reason - "Video Game" arose out of a technical discriptive of the actual process - an electronic device that connects to a telelvision set (usually through the antennta) and interfaces with the video signal decoder. I.E. at some point the signal from the game circuitry outputs it's information in a video signal. That's why quite often they were referred to as "TV Games". The term simply did not exist before the early 70's and release of the Odyssey and PONG, and it'd be rewriting history to state otherwise. It was later in the early 80's that the term became appropriated by the media and companies seeking to latch on to the term when it became a pop culture definition of any electronic game playing device with a display. Even LED handheld games were referred to as "video games" by some at the time. As a serious researcher, you have to differentiate and define what definition of "video games" you're using. The original term (which is solely applied to electronic games that interface through a CRT display via a video signal - hence the term "video game" or sometimes "tv games"), or the later evolved (and technically inaccurate) pop-culture definition of anything electronic with a display. That's why for instance the Game Preservation group of the International Game Developers Association (IGDA), which is composed of museums, archivers, and professional researchers and historians across the world, decided to go with the term "electronic game" instead of "video game" to account for these discrepancies. And again, there's a reason things like Spacewar, Tennis for Two, and other items consistently failed to invalidate the patents for "video games" and why said patents were called the landmark patents of the industry.

Edited November 14, 2010 by wgungfu

[Retro Rogue]

All the credit? There were no video games before Ralph and company and their first patents of the inudstry.

 

Not disputing, but I would argue Nolan Bushnell did just as much for the industry, he may not have come up with the technology but he was the one who put it into the mainstream.

 

Nolan and Ted (Ted actually designed the circuitry to interface with the video display and put up objects and the bulk of Computer Space itself), and I don't recall anybody disputing Nolan's contributions to the industry and popularizing of video games in this thread. You stated (what I took as) a condescending remark about David's site and his documentation of Ralph's (and his team's) documented accomplishments.

 

Hence my remark about giving Ralph all the credit, would video games be as big today if left to Ralph and Sanders/Magnavox, and Nolan never got involved ? Why is Nolan barely mentioned in Pong Story ?

 

Because he wasn't involved in the invention of it, which is what said material is discussing. He was involved in the popularization of it, which is not what the site is about.

 

Have you read the dismissive article on Tennis For Two ?

 

I don't see a dismissive article, I see an article that correctly discsusses Tennis For Two being a computer game, and one that demonstrated none of the defining characteristics to have invalidated said patents numerous times in court. And by the way, that article is written by Ralph, and based on said facts.

 

The point I was making is the author is focused entirely on Ralph and dismissive of any other contributing factors to the birth of the industry.

 

I see an entire page worth of other contributing factors, that's completely incorrect again. I'm sorry but the site is about documenting the birth of video technology to play games. There's no possibility of spinning that in another light.

 

 

What I was trying to say, although obviously not clearly, was the first video recording does not make it the first film it was the first step to producing a film. Was the first person to kick a ball the inventor of soccer ? or was it the guy who developed the idea ? What I was attempting to demonstrate is OXO, NIM et al are the first steps.

 

Complete obfuscation of the issue. We're not discussing the first person to kick a ball, which would be akin in this context to the first person to put a spot on a CRT screen. You tried to invalidate items designed specifically to play games through a video display (technology that just wasn't done at the time) simply because it wasn't commercially or publicly released yet (which would disclude Spacewar as well in it's inception - though if you try to say "yes but it became widely available" well then so did the items Ralph and company did in the 60's via the Odyssey which consisted of the same exact games/circuitry). I'm just going by the logical evidence of your hypothesis, and it's contradictory as shown.

 

 

 

I am finding these venonmous defining and catagorising of video games surprising, and perhaps you need to be a little more understanding that the wider public see no difference between a video game and a computer game, before I started this I had no idea that the type of display device you played a game on made such a difference. And sometimes the wider view is not the same as the academic's view.

 

That's the point however, it doesn't make the wider view correct. It was a wide view that the earth was flat at one time as well. I apologize if they come off as venonmous but that wasn't the intent. As a professional historian and researcher when you constantly have to come up against this later pop-culture derived interpretation that's being applied in hindsite - and people trying to base their reasoning surrounding it - it becomes frustrating because so many of the average people don't know better. And certain individuals have had vested interests in propping up the later appropriation as the standard in an attempt to rewrite history vs. what actually happened.

 

Quite right on both counts, It was not my intention to distort the facts just the point out what i felt Spacewar! was the main catalyst for the industry rightly or wrongly that is my current view.

 

I think what Spacewar! represents, and rightly so, is the first example of a full fledged interactive game played through an electronic display - even Ralph has stated that. Something electronically generated (in this case by a computer) that displays virtual objects on the electronic display and allows players to directly interact with said virtual objects for the express purposes of playing a game against each other. Earlier examples and games had no objects controlled directly by the player - even Tennis for Two simply used the controls to feed variables in for analog calculated equations for the ball, with no direct player manipulation of any objects on the screen.

 

As far as it's development and the hacker culture's development in general, I'd strongly recommend Steven Levy's book Hackers as mentioned. It's a good start for what you're looking for, and documents further things you may be looking for later - such as the first networked game which also occured there around the same time.

Edited November 14, 2010 by wgungfu

[sut]

You stated (what I took as) a condescending remark about David's site and his documentation of Ralph's (and his team's) documented accomplishments.

 

Apologies if it came across as condescending, but I also said it's a good site. I just find it a little imbalanced in places, almost as if David's on a personal mission to defend/promote Ralph at every juncture. For example the article: Tennis for Two The story of an early computer game by John Anderson. Throughout the article David puts corrections in the text, would it not have been better balance for David to put a paragraph at the start or end of the article explaining why he thought it was incorrect, rather than editing it ? It is a great site but I much prefer to be provided with the information, interpret the information myself and then discuss it on forums like this, rather than being told to dismiss things before I have chance to explore them.

 

Because he wasn't involved in the invention of it, which is what said material is discussing. He was involved in the popularization of it, which is not what the site is about.

 

Fair enough, but with a title like Pong Story I would think most people would link Nolan more closely with Pong than Ralph ? - From the title point of view I know Ralph got there first with Tennis, but Pong is synonymous with Nolan and vice-versa.

 

It was a wide view that the earth was flat at one time as well

Well that made me titter!

 

As a professional historian and researcher, when you constantly have to come up against this later pop-culture derived interpretation that's being applied in hindsite - and people trying to base their reasoning surrounding it, it becomes frustrating because so many of the average people don't know better.

 

I'm sure it is frustrating, but hey your helping the wider community i've learnt more on this forum from guys like you than I have done searching on the web. To be honest the whole video/computer/electronic game inception is very splintered and wide ranging which makes researching casually frustrating and at times daunting. I'm beginning to see why Chronogamer just focused on home consoles (Where are you Chronogamer! We miss you!).

I'm starting to see early electronic gaming as a funnel that starts wide then shrinks to what we perceive as video games today.

 

Computer Games --- Can be classified as video games when the Home Computer era begins

Video Games --- As is

LCD Games --- Can be classified as video games when Game Boy replaces these devices

Arcade Games

 

Eventually converge into one ? would this be a fair assessment ?

 

simply because it wasn't commercially or publicly released yet (which would disclude Spacewar as well in it's inception - though if you try to say "yes but it became widely available" well then so did the items Ralph and company did in the 60's via the Odyssey which consisted of the same exact games/circuitry).

 

Again finding this frustrating and confusing, suppose it would be easier if it was based around commercial releases, but on my brief research much gaming was not very 'commercial' until around the Atari VCS.

 

I am slowly starting to see your point but I have many layers of preconceptions to shed yet

[ComputerSpaceFan]

By the way, I thought you guys might be interested to know, it looks like some engineers are going to rebuild Willy Higgenbotham's Tennis for Two with all authentic parts this time.

 

I've got the schematics but never tried building the thing. Is it really such a tough circuit?

 

I just never bothered making it because I don't have an oscilloscope around to play it on, but according to the Wired article you really need a "later-model Donner computer" to make it authentic.

 

Well I hope they complete it ... in fact they would easily get my money if they offered to sell built units.

[sut]

I've decided to take a less anal approach to this by doing what I used to do as kid, Remember before MAME when you used to go to the local arcade and you played your favourite game ? What was the only option available at that time ? Yup you waited for a home conversion to your home computer/console !

 

Therefore I have decided to take this 'wait for the arcade to come home' approach to these early video/computer games as they would not have been accessable to the wider public being mostly big university computers,therefore I am now looking for home versions of the early games.

 

I would prefer to play these versions/conversions/clones or whatever best describes them on first/second generation consoles or early home computers.

So here what I've planned upto yet, any other suggestions would be welcome and any similar games for the ones where I haven't found a home version

would be greatly appreciated.

 

Missile Simualtor: None

 

(The more I research and learn about this device, the further away from a video/computer game it gets so not really expecting an home version of an electrical game).

 

Chess: Video Chess (Atari 2600)

 

Nim: Videocart #8 NIM (Fairchild Channel F)

 

OXO / Noughts and Crosses (Tic-Tac-Toe): Tic-Tac-Toe (APF Imagination Machine)

 

Tennis For Two: None

(Suppose Pong is a version, just from a different viewpoint)

 

Mouse in The Maze: Videocart #10 Maze (Fairchild Channel F)

 

Space War! / Galaxy Game: Space War (Atari 2600)

 

Space Travel: None

 

Presumably there must be a version, clone of this on the CBM Pet, Apple II or Atari 8-bit ? I'm astounded the lack of detail around for this game excluding it's historical significance for UNIX, but very little about the actual game, but I have at least now found a screenshot on UVL.

 

So there you go my revamped play through gaming history, as mentioned any better alternatives and suggestions would be most welcome.

Edited March 13, 2011 by sut

[sut]

Just an update on Odyssey 1 emualtion, I have stumbled across something of a much more complete emulator for the DS

 

http://dsgamemaker.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=4722&start=15

 

Worth a look for people interested in the Odyssey as it is in a far more advanced state than Odyemu currently is.

 

The author has done a really neat job thus far, but unfortunately it looks like it's joining the same state of limbo as Odyemu.

[Retro Rogue]

Just an update on Odyssey 1 emualtion, I have stumbled across something of a much more complete emulator for the DS

 

http://dsgamemaker.c...t=4722&start=15

 

Worth a look for people interested in the Odyssey as it is in a far more advanced state than Odyemu currently is.

 

The author has done a really neat job thus far, but unfortunately it looks like it's joining the same state of limbo as Odyemu.

 

a) It's pure hardware, so it can only be simulated as there's no actual code to run.

 

b) He's going off a youtube video and coding look-alikes, vs. Odyemu which actually tries to recreate the hardware from the schematics.

 

[user42]

You might be interested in this Gamebase I put together a while ago...

 

 

It is a collection of Arcade simulators for non-MAME-able games.

 

Download it here. http://www.gb64.com/...opic.php?t=4471

Edited August 19, 2011 by user42

[roland p]

...It is a collection of Arcade simulators for non-MAME-able games.

Interesting. How does that simulate Monaco GP? Does it really simulate the discrete logic (As in simulating the gates, counters, whatever it contains), or is the game reversed engineered by just looking at it?

[user42]

...It is a collection of Arcade simulators for non-MAME-able games.

Interesting. How does that simulate Monaco GP? Does it really simulate the discrete logic (As in simulating the gates, counters, whatever it contains), or is the game reversed engineered by just looking at it?

 

Well yep, that is what simulation is, (there are no roms to emulate...). Monaco GP is simulated in misfitMAME but not very well.