Star Castle 2600 2011 at Video Game Summit

[Nukey Shay]

Gah...I'm afraid to ask what amount the box would go for.

 

Sealed copy = six digits?

 

 

 

This is my goal: one show...goodbye.

[CPUWIZ]

[solidcorp]

 

I should have been clearer... I'm speaking of driving vertically, but to the right (or left) of the rings, so you can go continuously, without bouncing off the rings. Of course to fire on the rings you need to rotate, fire, "un-rotate", but that's true regardless of whether you're driving straight up or on an angle. Now I wish there was a machine I could find locally, or I had a proper controller for MAME (not that I'd use MAME, of course, because that would be illegal and all that ).

 

That won't work because you'll run right into the sparks once you've wrapped the screen.

 

The method in the video "stretches the playfield."

 

I really don't want to disappoint you guys, but the coin op patterns will probably only work because the mechanics are the same. Did the Pacman and Frogger patterns work? IDK

 

You guys in this forum know better than anyone that there are real limitations, particularly with RAM and timing on the 2600. Just about every byte of code in two banks that isn't graphics or the title screen is called every game frame, which isn't that unusual, but is a real constraint. I did my best to recreate the elements of the coin op as faithfully as possible. I even have the manual and schematics (yes I downloaded them, beat me up). If you have played any of my other ports you will see that reproduction is my focus and I think I do a pretty good job. I hope when you eventually get a chance to play you will think so too.

 

PS. I'm not sure which video you are looking at, I haven't recorded a new one this year yet. The old ship mechanics, as I said previously, were flawed and tended to straighten out on the horizontal at least.

[solidcorp]

Bah, no box, no glory!

 

You're probably not going to like this, but I have labels and I am working on a box, we'll see if I finish it, I may stop at labels.

 

I have no plans for a manual though.

[keilbaca]

I should have been clearer... I'm speaking of driving vertically, but to the right (or left) of the rings, so you can go continuously, without bouncing off the rings. Of course to fire on the rings you need to rotate, fire, "un-rotate", but that's true regardless of whether you're driving straight up or on an angle. Now I wish there was a machine I could find locally, or I had a proper controller for MAME (not that I'd use MAME, of course, because that would be illegal and all that ).

 

That won't work because you'll run right into the sparks once you've wrapped the screen.

 

The method in the video "stretches the playfield."

 

I really don't want to disappoint you guys, but the coin op patterns will probably only work because the mechanics are the same. Did the Pacman and Frogger patterns work? IDK

 

You guys in this forum know better than anyone that there are real limitations, particularly with RAM and timing on the 2600. Just about every byte of code in two banks that isn't graphics or the title screen is called every game frame, which isn't that unusual, but is a real constraint. I did my best to recreate the elements of the coin op as faithfully as possible. I even have the manual and schematics (yes I downloaded them, beat me up). If you have played any of my other ports you will see that reproduction is my focus and I think I do a pretty good job. I hope when you eventually get a chance to play you will think so too.

 

PS. I'm not sure which video you are looking at, I haven't recorded a new one this year yet. The old ship mechanics, as I said previously, were flawed and tended to straighten out on the horizontal at least.

 

Pac-man on the 2600 is nothing like the original arcade... Ms. Pac is closer, but still not right.

 

You should come to the expo show in Philly (If they have another one, whatever they decide to name it), so that RMaerz can come take a look at the game, and find out if the same patterns work.

Edited July 22, 2011 by keilbaca

[Nukey Shay]

Did the Pacman and Frogger patterns work?

Atari's Pac-Man was basically a different game (too many compromises). Monster AI and the maze layout was completely different than the arcade original.

 

AFAIK, no incarnation of Frogger had patterns...only strategies.

[Lord Helmet]

[ I also announced that I would be willing to sell it as a one of a kind item and if sold I'd be willing to release the source and binaries.

 

Similar things have been done with unreleased prototypes and extremely rare games, thought the decision to release the binary has usually rested with the purchaser of the 'rare' game. This time things are a bit different since you are the author of the game. I suppose once the original is sold both you and the new owner would have the right to release the rom.

 

I hope you find a buyer, because I'd love to play your game.

[solidcorp]

[ I also announced that I would be willing to sell it as a one of a kind item and if sold I'd be willing to release the source and binaries.

 

Similar things have been done with unreleased prototypes and extremely rare games, thought the decision to release the binary has usually rested with the purchaser of the 'rare' game. This time things are a bit different since you are the author of the game. I suppose once the original is sold both you and the new owner would have the right to release the rom.

 

I hope you find a buyer, because I'd love to play your game.

 

I think that is the kindest sentiment I've heard, thank you very much.

 

[+5-11under]

 

I should have been clearer... I'm speaking of driving vertically, but to the right (or left) of the rings, so you can go continuously, without bouncing off the rings. Of course to fire on the rings you need to rotate, fire, "un-rotate", but that's true regardless of whether you're driving straight up or on an angle. Now I wish there was a machine I could find locally, or I had a proper controller for MAME (not that I'd use MAME, of course, because that would be illegal and all that ).

 

That won't work because you'll run right into the sparks once you've wrapped the screen.

 

The method in the video "stretches the playfield."

I'm talking about when the sparks follow you across the edge of the screen. I'll need to try this again, someday, I guess.

[solidcorp]

 

I should have been clearer... I'm speaking of driving vertically, but to the right (or left) of the rings, so you can go continuously, without bouncing off the rings. Of course to fire on the rings you need to rotate, fire, "un-rotate", but that's true regardless of whether you're driving straight up or on an angle. Now I wish there was a machine I could find locally, or I had a proper controller for MAME (not that I'd use MAME, of course, because that would be illegal and all that ).

 

That won't work because you'll run right into the sparks once you've wrapped the screen.

 

The method in the video "stretches the playfield."

I'm talking about when the sparks follow you across the edge of the screen. I'll need to try this again, someday, I guess.

 

I'm not sure what "stretches the playfield" means, but...

the sparks stop at the edge of the screen and respawn in the center. I know they could occasionally follow the ship across the edges of the screen in the coin op and they rode shields (or places shields should be) on the rings to get out, but they don't do that on the 2600, that was one of the compromises I had to make. They eventually get faster than the ship now, but I believe can still be outmaneuvered.

 

 

I could tone it down but ran out of time, bytes, and cycles before VGS. There's compromises in every coin op port to a lesser capable platform. Despite these compromises the game really captures the feel and play of Star Castle, at least for everyone who has played it so far who knows the coin op. It sounds like you know the coin op much better than anyone who has played it so far. I wonder how many you would notice if I didn't outline them here.

[solidcorp]

 

I should have been clearer... I'm speaking of driving vertically, but to the right (or left) of the rings, so you can go continuously, without bouncing off the rings. Of course to fire on the rings you need to rotate, fire, "un-rotate", but that's true regardless of whether you're driving straight up or on an angle. Now I wish there was a machine I could find locally, or I had a proper controller for MAME (not that I'd use MAME, of course, because that would be illegal and all that ).

 

That won't work because you'll run right into the sparks once you've wrapped the screen.

 

The method in the video "stretches the playfield."

I'm talking about when the sparks follow you across the edge of the screen. I'll need to try this again, someday, I guess.

 

Ah, reread the post and I agree, if you just keep wrapping, vertically or horizontally in either the coin op or 2600...

• If you do keep thrusting without pointing at the shields, it's hard to get shots in on the shields and cannon.
  
• If you don't keep thrusting you will decelerate to a stop and the sparks or fuzzball (I don't know what the cannons shot is called) will get you.
  
• If you do keep wrapping, eventually the sparks will drift into your path, you can keep shooting them but they don't score, that's just a stalemate at best, people usually try it sooner or later, feel like they are winning but eventually the timing of the sparks allows one of them to clip or broadside you.

Edited July 23, 2011 by solidcorp

[+5-11under]

 

I should have been clearer... I'm speaking of driving vertically, but to the right (or left) of the rings, so you can go continuously, without bouncing off the rings. Of course to fire on the rings you need to rotate, fire, "un-rotate", but that's true regardless of whether you're driving straight up or on an angle. Now I wish there was a machine I could find locally, or I had a proper controller for MAME (not that I'd use MAME, of course, because that would be illegal and all that ).

 

That won't work because you'll run right into the sparks once you've wrapped the screen.

 

The method in the video "stretches the playfield."

I'm talking about when the sparks follow you across the edge of the screen. I'll need to try this again, someday, I guess.

 

Ah, reread the post and I agree, if you just keep wrapping, vertically or horizontally in either the coin op or 2600...

• If you do keep thrusting without pointing at the shields, it's hard to get shots in on the shields and cannon.
  
• If you don't keep thrusting you will decelerate to a stop and the sparks or fuzzball (I don't know what the cannons shot is called) will get you.
  
• If you do keep wrapping, eventually the sparks will drift into your path, you can keep shooting them but they don't score, that's just a stalemate at best, people usually try it sooner or later, feel like they are winning but eventually the timing of the sparks allows one of them to clip or broadside you.

As I mentioned, it's been a long time since I last played the game. If the sparks are following fast, and past the edge of the screen: I can't remember if I held down the thrust button all the time or just most of the time... probably whatever it took to keep ahead of the sparks. Anyway, every cycle/wrap across the screen, I would momentarily point to the shields, fire a shot or two, then follow my line again... which is therefore more of a wave than a straight line.

[Schizophretard]

I should have been clearer... I'm speaking of driving vertically, but to the right (or left) of the rings, so you can go continuously, without bouncing off the rings. Of course to fire on the rings you need to rotate, fire, "un-rotate", but that's true regardless of whether you're driving straight up or on an angle. Now I wish there was a machine I could find locally, or I had a proper controller for MAME (not that I'd use MAME, of course, because that would be illegal and all that ).

 

That won't work because you'll run right into the sparks once you've wrapped the screen.

 

The method in the video "stretches the playfield."

 

I really don't want to disappoint you guys, but the coin op patterns will probably only work because the mechanics are the same. Did the Pacman and Frogger patterns work? IDK

 

You guys in this forum know better than anyone that there are real limitations, particularly with RAM and timing on the 2600. Just about every byte of code in two banks that isn't graphics or the title screen is called every game frame, which isn't that unusual, but is a real constraint. I did my best to recreate the elements of the coin op as faithfully as possible. I even have the manual and schematics (yes I downloaded them, beat me up). If you have played any of my other ports you will see that reproduction is my focus and I think I do a pretty good job. I hope when you eventually get a chance to play you will think so too.

 

PS. I'm not sure which video you are looking at, I haven't recorded a new one this year yet. The old ship mechanics, as I said previously, were flawed and tended to straighten out on the horizontal at least.

 

Pac-man on the 2600 is nothing like the original arcade... Ms. Pac is closer, but still not right.

 

You should come to the expo show in Philly (If they have another one, whatever they decide to name it), so that RMaerz can come take a look at the game, and find out if the same patterns work.

 

Taking a game that is worth $32,768 to a classic gaming expo is a bad idea. It should always be in a bank vault.

[roland p]

If I ever finish Ballblazer, maybe we could just trade and then both release our sources and binairies to the public?

 

hehehe, I loved Ballblazer too (along with Boulderdash) - It took a while staring but I thought that's what your profile pic was.

 

 

It's a sort of resolution experiment, which should increase resolution for moving sprites. And making masking big sprites easier because the raster is fixed. I don't know if I'm going to use it in my homebrew, but I'll know soon, I'm working on the sprite-part at the moment.

 

You can download the latest binairy here

Edited July 23, 2011 by roland p

[solidcorp]

If I ever finish Ballblazer, maybe we could just trade and then both release our sources and binairies to the public?

 

hehehe, I loved Ballblazer too (along with Boulderdash) - It took a while staring but I thought that's what your profile pic was.

 

 

It's a sort of resolution experiment, which should increase resolution for moving sprites. And making masking big sprites easier because the raster is fixed. I don't know if I'm going to use it in my homebrew, but I'll know soon, I'm working on the sprite-part at the moment.

 

You can download the latest binairy here

 

Wow, it not only looks great - spot on as a matter of fact - but it feels great. You nailed the weight, motion and colors, and did a really fantastic job using the playfield bits for the checkerboard. They look remarkably high res - just like they did with the stretched player bits on the original on the Atari 400/800. The antialiased horizontal lines between the checkerboard squares are awesome too. I can't wait to see it when it's done.

 

How are you planning on doing the rotofoils, ball, and the goal? - the 400/800 had 4 players, missiles (and a ball? I don't think so I forget) and still stretched them - I bet there's a way to do it well though.

[roland p]

Wow, it not only looks great - spot on as a matter of fact - but it feels great. You nailed the weight, motion and colors, and did a really fantastic job using the playfield bits for the checkerboard. They look remarkably high res - just like they did with the stretched player bits on the original on the Atari 400/800. The antialiased horizontal lines between the checkerboard squares are awesome too. I can't wait to see it when it's done.

Thanks! That means a lot to me, since you've programmed games professionally for the Lynx.

 

Positions of rotofoils are stored in 24-bit values. 16-bit values made it sluggish. Playfield is done by changing background color. The skewing of the checkerboard is done by a Bresenham-like algorithm.

 

How are you planning on doing the rotofoils, ball, and the goal? - the 400/800 had 4 players, missiles (and a ball? I don't think so I forget) and still stretched them - I bet there's a way to do it well though.

 

Player0 & 1 for the rotofoil, missiles 0 and 1 for goalbeams, Ball for ball

The missile and ball have not much choices for the widths, but I just make it work and see if it looks good. The ball will probably be a square, to make it round I have to reposition it, which will create black lines (caused by triggering the HMOVE register). Using playfield bits is probably too difficult but we'll see.

 

I had the rotofoils already in version 1, but I didn't have the motivation to continue that. Now I've started a fresh version 2 (since a few months) which will be more optimised and cooler (previous version had blank lines in the checkerboard).

[Syntaxerror999]

[i read some of your more verbose edits yesterday ]

 

I think this project passed "homebrew" a long time ago - and to be clear, I feel all projects started without a publisher begin as homebrew, but whether you are a professional game developer or an anonymous talented programmer, at some point when you create a complete quality salable game you cross a line from a hobbyist to something else.

Yeah, sorry about that. Was my initial reaction to the sticker shock. Okay, so... you've got a game that you consider commercial quality. Great. Why not sell it inline within the confines of common sense as a commercial release, such as this, usually is then? I'm sorry, but it is my strong opinion that $32k outright and upfront is an absolutely ridiculous figure to expect. The modern Atari 2600 scene is not like dealing with major book publishers and world famous authors.

 

Getting back down to earth, if you're looking to cash in on your work, why not sell it online or through the various dealers such as Atari Age? Again, within the confines of common sense. $30 a pop, maybe $20 more with an instruction manual and box. There are people here that can create professional and commercial quality labels, manuals and boxes. While you'll probably never make your $32k, you'd at least have somewhat of a steady stream of cash for a little bit.

 

Look at Fulop's incomplete robot game he released at a pie in the sky price. Packaged it nicely and provided some history, but he totally alienated a majority of the user base that *would* have dolled out $30-$50. I guess this is why companies pay other companies to tell them who their customers are. lol OR perhaps it's an ego and perceived self worth or "integrity" thing. I don't know.

 

 

These sort of deals just leave a bad taste in my mouth. My opinions of course. At the end of the day, it's just a game we're talking about. Or not.

 

My issue is at $32k it should come with the distribution rights and all copies of the biraries. Basicly it would become the intulectual property of the buyer. THAT would make the price fair. And to say "ask the buyer if its ok to make more later on" is like robbing someone then kicking them in the crotch.

 

And not to make accuasations... but whats to stop you from telling like 10 people they are buying the "only copy"

[Syntaxerror999]

I'd have to play this 2600 version myself, but I just can't see how using a joystick and one button is able to get close in replicating the precision that is required to perform the double attack which for most players is a requirement once you hit 18,000.

Use a controller built with Asteroids in mind? IIRC, there was a couple of types made back in the day.

Mmm, yes... love my Starplex controller

 

 

That homemade?

[CPUWIZ]

I'd have to play this 2600 version myself, but I just can't see how using a joystick and one button is able to get close in replicating the precision that is required to perform the double attack which for most players is a requirement once you hit 18,000.

Use a controller built with Asteroids in mind? IIRC, there was a couple of types made back in the day.

Mmm, yes... love my Starplex controller

 

 

That homemade?

 

No.

[solidcorp]

My issue is at $32k it should come with the distribution rights and all copies of the biraries. Basicly it would become the intulectual property of the buyer. THAT would make the price fair. And to say "ask the buyer if its ok to make more later on" is like robbing someone then kicking them in the crotch.

Several took issue with the $32k itself, now it "should" come with distribution rights? A deal is an agreement between two willing parties. I have described terms that I am comfortable with, If there is something you would like ask for it.

 

Are you or anyone else interested in the distribution rights? If so, contact me directly. I've promised that if the buyer asks that I release it I will. If not, all bets are off. I'm reasonable and flexible if you or anyone else has a more "creative" idea.

 

And not to make accuasations... but whats to stop you from telling like 10 people they are buying the "only copy"

 

No accusation taken, but in defense of my honor consider that I have been making video games for 30 years, professionally for 24 starting at Atari. I've owned two successful video game software development companies, one video production company, and I have been nothing if not honorable. Until now, I've been a rather boring figure in video game history. If you don't believe me (and you shouldn't) look it up or ask people who've worked with me.

 

But you raise one very real and serious issue: How do we authenticate a one and only true original cartridge?

 

I offer the following suggestions...

 

A notarized sealed privately held series of detailed digital photographs along with a certificate of authenticity signed by me could document the original cartridge.

 

The following features make it unique:

 

1. The cartridge PCB was hand cut with a Dremel rotary tool.
   
2. The PCB had to be altered, additional components were added, and the entire board was hand soldered which leaves unique solder patterns nearly impossible to recreate.
   
3. The cartridge case was milled on a machine that I made. There are literally thousands of tool marks and a few slight imperfections that I am aware of that are unique to the cartridge shell.
   
4. The first half case came loose in the clamps and was destroyed by the tool, the second was too thick, the third and fourth fit but I hadn't accounted for the size of the EEPROM in the socket. I had run out of time before VGS so I had to hand Dremel some of the interior of the cartridge away leaving irregular "craftsman" tool marks.
   
5. The cartridge PCB sat ever so slightly too far back in the first prototype and didn't make contact in the VCS (I was heartbroken). It has to be held forward by two thicknesses of a CD case that were hand cut with shears, they should also be unique and irreplaceable.
   
6. I should sign the cartridge somewhere - inside or out.
   
7. I should mark (scribe) the cartridge PCB and/or shell with a serial number 00001. (What to you think, more zeroes? too many?)
   
8. I should add and document secret markings for authentication only. The documents should be sealed and stored for if and when authentication ever needs to be validated.
   

All of these details should be impossible to recreate or at least uneconomical for the price asked.

 

There is no way I can think of to authenticate a program burned into a particular ROM. I could fill some unused portion of the ROM with a watermark or secret checksum or something but ultimately it can be easily copied.

 

And finally, let's not get ahead of ourselves, I will be hard pressed to ever find one buyer at a fraction of the asking price, let alone ten.

[solidcorp]

And finally, let's not get ahead of ourselves, I will be hard pressed to ever find one buyer at a fraction of the asking price, let alone ten.

...even though no serious Atari 2600 collection can be complete without it.

 

And rich dudes out there consider your popularity if you not only became the guy who bought the most rare and expensive game ever, but ALSO became a hero by releasing the game for all to enjoy!

 

Too Gorfy? Too tacky?

 

I thought so.

 

Just kidding (I've had a few glasses of wine)

 

Cheers

[Keatah]

If you're going to authenticate it with some markings. Make a few microscopic ones. Do a few select scratches in the solder and partly reflow them. You could simply bend some wire till it almost splits and look at the stretch marks. Or perhaps mash it with pliers and partly solder it. You could make a custom masked rom, but that could get expensive. You can also magnetize some metal on pcb to a certain field strength. Or somehow re-texture some parts or the inside of the cart. Perhaps scrape the coating off a non-contacting side of one of the rom's socket's pins. Or make some indentation in the copper and go over it with solder. And the mark and dent would only reveal itself as an imperfection only if you suck the solder off it. It can easily be put back too. Subtle changes in the diameter of one of the vias or feedthroughs - easily done with drill bit. The list really is endless. Look!

 

You could authenticate the rom chip with a precision ohm meter. Not every chip will give the same precise static measurements. This could be more expensive. Or use a 10% tolerance resistor and record the ohmic value to xxx.xxxx or something. Nick the insulation on something and take a microscope picture of it. Leave a certain kind of layer of dust?

 

You can x-ray the whole shebang and take some pictures and note some irregularities here and there. Like the pattern and spacing of the wires connecting the rom chip substrate to the casing and external leads. Or a simple photomicrograph of those wires.

 

What about the bond-pads? Each pad will have good connections, but each will be different. Just x-a-ray those. Or use a good microscope and pocket camera. Those wires will have different spacings.

 

Ceramic disc capacitors are world of entropy in and of themselves. The outer coating is unique to each and every one. And so are the markings. Even today there are variances.

 

The precise positioning between some items. Take lots of measurements. Just use a micro-caliper. These are cheap or ask your local watchmaker to borrow his.

 

Trim some of the soldered connections just so. And macro photo those. Measure height and shape.

 

The shape of some adhesive.

 

A cheap way is to simply scratch something and put a drop of cyanoacrylate (super glue) in the scratch. Smear it around and photograph that! The crystal pattern will be as unique as an individual snowflake.. Just be sure to note the gross as well as the fine features. Because the adhesive could change with age over a really long time period. Don't count on color, just the shapes.

 

Whatever you do, make it small. The smaller items are overlooked, and often hemmed and hawed over in determining what is fake and what is real. And small items and harder to duplicate unless you get specialized equipment. Especially the frayed edge of a wire-cut, done with worn cutters.

 

Put some pubic hair under the label. Now you have DNA authentication too! Mark something with that secret agent invisible ink stuff. Mark something with a Sharpie and look at the streak marks.

 

Paper fiber patterns on a small handwritten label affixed to something inside. Or glue a dead tree/tea leaf inside it, and photomicrograph that.

 

This is like making a 3d checksum isn't it?

 

Best only you know what you did. Because who will know what needs to be duped and what does not?

Edited July 24, 2011 by Keatah

[Schizophretard]

You could get Howard Scott Warshaw to sign it?

[Matthew]

If you're going to authenticate it with some markings. Make a few microscopic ones. Do a few select scratches in the solder and partly reflow them. You could simply bend some wire till it almost splits and look at the stretch marks. Or perhaps mash it with pliers and partly solder it. You could make a custom masked rom, but that could get expensive. You can also magnetize some metal on pcb to a certain field strength. Or somehow re-texture some parts or the inside of the cart. Perhaps scrape the coating off a non-contacting side of one of the rom's socket's pins. Or make some indentation in the copper and go over it with solder. And the mark and dent would only reveal itself as an imperfection only if you suck the solder off it. It can easily be put back too. Subtle changes in the diameter of one of the vias or feedthroughs - easily done with drill bit. The list really is endless. Look!

 

You could authenticate the rom chip with a precision ohm meter. Not every chip will give the same precise static measurements. This could be more expensive. Or use a 10% tolerance resistor and record the ohmic value to xxx.xxxx or something. Nick the insulation on something and take a microscope picture of it. Leave a certain kind of layer of dust?

 

You can x-ray the whole shebang and take some pictures and note some irregularities here and there. Like the pattern and spacing of the wires connecting the rom chip substrate to the casing and external leads. Or a simple photomicrograph of those wires.

 

What about the bond-pads? Each pad will have good connections, but each will be different. Just x-a-ray those. Or use a good microscope and pocket camera. Those wires will have different spacings.

 

Ceramic disc capacitors are world of entropy in and of themselves. The outer coating is unique to each and every one. And so are the markings. Even today there are variances.

 

The precise positioning between some items. Take lots of measurements. Just use a micro-caliper. These are cheap or ask your local watchmaker to borrow his.

 

Trim some of the soldered connections just so. And macro photo those. Measure height and shape.

 

The shape of some adhesive.

 

A cheap way is to simply scratch something and put a drop of cyanoacrylate (super glue) in the scratch. Smear it around and photograph that! The crystal pattern will be as unique as an individual snowflake.. Just be sure to note the gross as well as the fine features. Because the adhesive could change with age over a really long time period. Don't count on color, just the shapes.

 

Whatever you do, make it small. The smaller items are overlooked, and often hemmed and hawed over in determining what is fake and what is real. And small items and harder to duplicate unless you get specialized equipment. Especially the frayed edge of a wire-cut, done with worn cutters.

 

Put some pubic hair under the label. Now you have DNA authentication too! Mark something with that secret agent invisible ink stuff. Mark something with a Sharpie and look at the streak marks.

 

Paper fiber patterns on a small handwritten label affixed to something inside. Or glue a dead tree/tea leaf inside it, and photomicrograph that.

 

This is like making a 3d checksum isn't it?

 

Best only you know what you did. Because who will know what needs to be duped and what does not?

 

 

LMAO, this is just another homebrew, not a Picasso.

[GroovyBee]

LMAO, this is just another homebrew, not a Picasso.

 

To you "it's just another homebrew" to the developer of the game (or most homebrews for that matter) its 100s of hours of their time to make it.