Intellivision vs Arcade

[Games For Your Intellivision]

 

Dz Writes:

 

"And finally, I'll add that, as evidenced by my posting record, I never shy away from an argument and I don't have any qualms in vociferously defending my position or retorting in kind to personal attacks. So, the fact that I am actively denying attacking Carl or singling out his games, should tell you something."

 

Yes, we know you never back down and always have to have the last word.

 

I am an English teacher and English is my native language. I understand nuance. Perhaps it is you that don't understand how you are coming across? I don't know. We will just have to give you the benefit of the doubt.

 

It isn't my game(s) that were under discussion and I have no feeling of being 'insulted'. However, I can understand how Carl could figure it that way. Perhaps he was also 'retorting in kind to personal attacks'? (Or at least felt that way).

 

However, accusing him of encouraging people not to vote for Piggy didn't happen, and is not helpful. Also trying to understand how being dismissive of someones hard work (or at least appearing to be) could provoke a reaction, could go a long way.

[+DZ-Jay]

As for Burgertime, I much prefer the Intellivision version over the arcade. WHY?, simple, I played the intellivision version hundreds maybe thousands of time before ever seeing this game in an arcade.

The arcade version can't make the 3x4 screen do what intellivision's 4x3 screen did. Yes, to me the intellivision is the original version! This is how it is, everything else is a copy of it.

 

I love the Intellivision version of Burgertime, but I grew up playing the one on the arcade first (I only acquired Burgertime much later), so I was already biased by the screen layout, colours, and sound effects.

 

That said, like I mentioned above, I agree that the Intellivision port is The Definitive port on any console, even when compared to the version on my other beloved toy from my childhood with much increased capabilities: the Commodore 64.

 

They really took pains into making not only a port, but a great use of the Intellivision hardware itself. It could have been an original!

 

The first version of a song you like is the original, even if some recorded years earlier.... I think it is just how our minds work. ( I usually like the original versions better, even if I didn't hear it first ), just an observation of my friends and acquaintances. In fact, I can't stand remakes that are similar to the original... Why bother? When a remake is re-crafted, different cadence, or stressing different parts etc. I can like multiple versions of a song. But if it is the same cookie cutter thing, blah, not worth the effort.

 

This is very true, which is why it is interesting to read other people's opinions on this thread as to why they prefer one over the other, rather than just "because it is the version I played when I was a kid."

 

There's also the third option (like you mentioned about your experience with D2K): being able to appreciate both the old and the new and enjoy them both. There are countless songs that I just love the nuanced differences in style and interpretation of versions made across generations.

 

As I mentioned above, most of the time I'm in the "arcade" camp. That's mostly because my experience shaped as a child was that arcade games were The Standard, implemented on dedicated hardware, designed for the game capabilities; and home ports were compromises to fit your cheaper machine. That wasn't some sort of adopted generalization, it was what I actually experienced with my beloved games (mostly the classics from 1979 to 1983).

 

Like with many other things, your mileage may vary.

 

-dZ.

Edited June 4, 2016 by DZ-Jay

[mr_me]

I think the first screen in Jeff's D2K (arcade hack version) is a pita. It was a good idea that Carl replaced it. The second Inteliivision D2K on the SE cartridge is more comparable to the arcade hack.

 

So the extra music in Carl's DK Arcade is actually programmed in the original arcade game but never used? Is that the game over music in Carl's DK Arcade.

 

Radar Scope reminds of Beamrider; not enough to call it an arcade conversion.

[+DZ-Jay]

 

So the extra music in Carl's DK Arcade is actually programmed in the original arcade game but never used? Is that the game over music in Carl's DK Arcade.

I think it's the song that plays during the title screen (is that the same as in game-over?).

Edited June 4, 2016 by DZ-Jay

[Place Logo Here]

Another vote for "Intellivision Burgertime is superior to arcade". I never even saw the coin op until long after I had the cart (actually, even long after I had Super BT) and I just didn't like the layout of the screens. Also, God forbid, the enemies in the Intv version are very "cute" (a word I rarely use).

 

I also like DK Arcade much more than the arcade version but then I am not that big of a fan of Donkey Kong, period. And I love the Intv DK2 cart but rarely play it just because the game is so freakin' hard. That isn't a complaint--only my preferences.

 

As for Mousetrap, I like the Intv version but I think the Colecovision version is superior. And I prefer either over the arcade, and is only because the coin op starts out too difficult (the hawk on the first level--really?).

 

Strangely enough, I have never seen an arcade Bump 'n' Jump, which might be in my top 10 of favorite Intv games.

[Flojomojo]

If you have a PlayStation 3, PSP, or Vita, you can play a nice console port (emulation, most likely) of Burning Rubber, which is the original Japanese name for Bump 'n' Jump. I remember the game press fawning over the Intellivision game. It was years before I ever saw the arcade game --and for me, that might have actually been the NES version. It's so long ago!

 

A pox on both houses for anyone picking on homebrew authors, it's really unattractive. You should apologize and back down, not be pistol dueling at dawn.

[+DZ-Jay]

If you have a PlayStation 3, PSP, or Vita, you can play a nice console port (emulation, most likely) of Burning Rubber, which is the original Japanese name for Bump 'n' Jump. I remember the game press fawning over the Intellivision game. It was years before I ever saw the arcade game --and for me, that might have actually been the NES version. It's so long ago!

 

 

 

You know, I don't think I've ever played the arcade Bump 'n' Jump game. I like the Intellivision version, but it is hardly my favourite game (perhaps because I didn't own it when I was young).

 

<goes into his MAME collection...>

 

I found Burnin' Rubber and a "cassette" version of Bump 'N' Jump. Hmmm... I must say that, apart from a more colourful screen and a bit more resolution, the game-play is not much different from the Intellivision. As opposed to, say, Burgertime, where the screen orientation and the resolution change the aspect of the playing field.

 

-dZ.

 

P.S. Do you know if there are any differences between Burnin' Rubber and Bump 'N' Jump, other than the market focus?

Edited June 4, 2016 by DZ-Jay

[Games For Your Intellivision]

Bump N Jump for the Intellivision is an astonishingly good port in my opinion. Considering it was done by some hackers with a Playcable, even more so.

[+DZ-Jay]

Bump N Jump for the Intellivision is an astonishingly good port in my opinion. Considering it was done by some hackers with a Playcable, even more so.

 

You know, I always heard those two stories separately: they reversed engineered the EXEC from a Play-Cable and started making games, which caught the attention of Mattel; and as a consequence, Mattel hired them and assigned Bump 'N' Jump as their first project.

 

I've never actually heard it specified that they created the port of Bump 'N' Jump as the result of their Play-Cable hacking; as opposed to after being hired by Mattel and given much greater insight and access into the hardware and software, by virtue of being bonafide employees. Is that really a fact?

 

-dZ.

Edited June 4, 2016 by DZ-Jay

[Games For Your Intellivision]

 

You know, I always heard those two stories separately: they reversed engineered the EXEC from a Play-Cable and started making games, which caught the attention of Mattel; and as a consequence, Mattel hired them and assigned Bump 'N' Jump as their first project.

 

I've never actually heard it specified that they created the port of Bump 'N' Jump as the result of their Play-Cable hacking; as opposed to after being hired by Mattel and given much greater insight and access into the hardware and software, by virtue of being bonafide employees. Is that really a fact?

 

-dZ.

 

The story as I remember it was that they hacked the Intellivision with a Play-Cable...contacted Mattel and 'threatened them' that they'd go to a competitor with their information if they didn't hire them to do games. Dave Warhol was tasked to 'supervise' them as they were assigned Bump and Jump, but never actually went to Mattel. How much 'mainframe' help they had or assistance is unknown as far as I know.

 

The port is just top notch though.

[+cvga]

Now if the Intellivision could add some great shooters.

Beamrider is often overlooked and is an incredible shooter. Unfortunately there's not an arcade counterpart although it has a bit of a "Tempest" feel.

[Flojomojo]

I think you need to put yourself back into the time when it was released to really enjoy it. Having a jump button (instead of a "fire" button) was pretty new back then. Having a jump button FOR A CAR was unheard of!

 

Way more fun than the casino games they were pushing at the time.

[+DZ-Jay]

The story as I remember it was that they hacked the Intellivision with a Play-Cable...contacted Mattel and 'threatened them' that they'd go to a competitor with their information if they didn't hire them to do games. Dave Warhol was tasked to 'supervise' them as they were assigned Bump and Jump, but never actually went to Mattel. How much 'mainframe' help they had or assistance is unknown as far as I know.

 

To me, that doesn't sound like they actually created Bump 'N' Jump in the dark themselves from the Play-Cable hacking/reverse-engineering effort alone. Even the BSR page on the subject suggests that they received technical assistance from Mattel programmers:

 

 

DEVELOPMENT HISTORY

One day, Mattel Electronics was contacted by a couple of guys from New Jersey, Joe Jacobs and Dennis Clark, with startling information: they had hooked up a PlayCable unit to a personal computer and made their own Intellivision development system. They demonstrated that they had figured out how to program Intellivision games quite well, and they wanted to offer their services to Mattel before going to some other company. Ah, blackmail is such an ugly word...

To keep them away from the competition, Mattel contracted with them to program the Intellivision version of the arcade game Bump 'N' Jump. They, under the name Technology Associates, were paid $24,000 for the conversion.

David Warhol (Mind Strike) served as liaison, giving technical assistance as needed. Except for the title screen graphics by Daisy Nguyen, all the work was done in New Jersey, in one of the programmers' basements; they weren't invited to Mattel headquarters.

 

They implemented the game themselves, true, and they managed to learn enough from their Play-Cable escapade to impress (or scare) Mattel, but it's a bit of a stretch to claim that it was "done by some hackers with a Play-Cable."

 

 

The port is just top notch though.

 

Agreed.

[+fdr4prez]

I always thought that a "port" was talking the original code and making it run on different hardware, thus making it portable

 

And a conversion is complete rewriting of the code from scratch for the new system so that it runs/behaves in a similar way as the original.

 

As such, all arcade games written for home consoles are conversions and not ports since none of them are using the original code, so using the term "port" in this case is widely misused, but generally accepted.

 

No?

[+DZ-Jay]

I think you need to put yourself back into the time when it was released to really enjoy it. Having a jump button (instead of a "fire" button) was pretty new back then. Having a jump button FOR A CAR was unheard of!

 

Way more fun than the casino games they were pushing at the time.

 

True, it was quite an original concept at the time.

[+DZ-Jay]

I always thought that a "port" was talking the original code and making it run on different hardware, thus making it portable

 

And a conversion is complete rewriting of the code from scratch for the new system so that it runs/behaves in a similar way as the original.

 

As such, all arcade games written for home consoles are conversions and not ports since none of them are using the original code, so using the term "port" in this case is widely misused, but generally accepted.

 

No?

 

I believe Carl reverse-engineered the original code of Donkey Kong and Ms. Pac-Man from their arcade ROMs and "ported" it to the Intellivision. This is why he was able to find hidden graphics, music, and samples and include them in his version. I would call that a port.

 

My (unfinished) version of Pac-Man (which later turned into Christmas Carol) was implemented from careful observation of the game and by reading online non-technical descriptions of the mechanics; without any knowledge of -- or insight into -- the original code. Thus, it was to be a conversion.

 

Bump 'N' Jump, Burgertime, Coleco's games, etc., are all conversions.

 

That said, generally, you are right; although most lay-people use the terms interchangeably.

 

-dZ.

Edited June 4, 2016 by DZ-Jay

[mr_me]

I agree with fdr4prez that "port" means reusing the original code with perhaps only some minor changes. The code is portable. If the CPU is different, it maybe be possible with higher level languages but for assembly, most likely the code has to be re-written. If you have access to the original code it is converted or translated. I prefer the term "converted" rather than port. But most people say "port"; and I agree with fdr4prez that people are using the term incorrectly.

 

--------------------------------

This is what Keith Robinson said about the BumpNjump programmers:

"One day, Mattel Electronics was contacted by a couple of guys from New Jersey, Joe Jacobs and Dennis Clark, with startling information: they had hooked up a PlayCable unit to a personal computer and made their own Intellivision development system. They demonstrated that they had figured out how to program Intellivision games quite well, and they wanted to offer their services to Mattel before going to some other company. Ah, blackmail is such an ugly word...

To keep them away from the competition, Mattel contracted with them to program the Intellivision version of the arcade game Bump 'N' Jump. They, under the name Technology Associates, were paid $24,000 for the conversion.

David Warhol (Mind Strike) served as liaison, giving technical assistance as needed. Except for the title screen graphics by Daisy Nguyen, all the work was done in New Jersey, in one of the programmers' basements; they weren't invited to Mattel headquarters."

 

They got unauthorised access to the PlayCable memory, Isn't that the definition of 'hack'?

edit: reverse engineering is just a fancy term for 'hack'

I think David W. talked about it in one of the podcasts; I can't remember, but I wouldn't be surprised if he said he didn't need to provide much technical help.

 

-----------------------

I see Beamrider being Tempest-like but I think it was inspired by Radar Scope. It could be a just a coincidence; you'd have to ask Tom Loughry. Similarly I think Sub Hunt was inspired by Fire One.

Edited June 4, 2016 by mr_me

[Games For Your Intellivision]

 

To me, that doesn't sound like they actually created Bump 'N' Jump in the dark themselves from the Play-Cable hacking/reverse-engineering effort alone. Even the BSR page on the subject suggests that they received technical assistance from Mattel programmers:

 

 

They implemented the game themselves, true, and they managed to learn enough from their Play-Cable escapade to impress (or scare) Mattel, but it's a bit of a stretch to claim that it was "done by some hackers with a Play-Cable."

 

 

 

 

In your quote, you say "David Warhol (Mind Strike) served as liaison, giving technical assistance as needed. Except for the title screen graphics by Daisy Nguyen, all the work was done in New Jersey, in one of the programmers' basements; they weren't invited to Mattel headquarters."

 

This implies that they did indeed use their Play-Cable development kit to do the port. It doesn't state how much 'tech assistance' they got 'as needed' but they probably didn't use the Mattel mainframes.

 

It would be interesting to find out from Dave Warhol how much help they actually got or if they had done that mainly on their own.

[Games For Your Intellivision]

I always thought that a "port" was talking the original code and making it run on different hardware, thus making it portable

 

And a conversion is complete rewriting of the code from scratch for the new system so that it runs/behaves in a similar way as the original.

 

As such, all arcade games written for home consoles are conversions and not ports since none of them are using the original code, so using the term "port" in this case is widely misused, but generally accepted.

 

No?

 

To be specific, yes, they are conversions not ports. Ports use a portion of code unchanged and make various changes for graphic and memory location differences in computers.

 

However, just like people use 'bathroom' and 'washroom' interchangeably, I'd say that is what is happening.

 

Boulder Dash was a 'conversion' not a port as the original source was only used to check a few things and generally ignored.

[+DZ-Jay]

 

To be specific, yes, they are conversions not ports. Ports use a portion of code unchanged and make various changes for graphic and memory location differences in computers.

 

However, just like people use 'bathroom' and 'washroom' interchangeably, I'd say that is what is happening.

 

Boulder Dash was a 'conversion' not a port as the original source was only used to check a few things and generally ignored.

 

My understanding is that "porting" the code means translating the instructions from one CPU to another. It means a one-to-one (or close to it) instruction/statement translation.

 

If you only include in your definition re-using the same code verbatim in another architecture (which, in practice, is not really possible with Assembly Language); that's merely a re-compilation, because that abstraction is what the compiler does underneath.

 

A "conversion" on the other hand, is just re-implementing the game without the original source -- not even reverse-engineering the game, just re-implementing it by observation of the mechanics and functions.

 

Here's what Wikipedia says:

 

 

 

When code is not compatible with a particular operating system or architecture, the code must be "carried" to the new system.

 

 

 

 

Porting is also the term used when a video game designed to run on one platform, be it an arcade, video game console, or personal computer, is converted to run on a different platform. Earlier video game "ports" were often not true ports, but rather reworked versions of the games. However, many 21st century video games are developed using software that can output code for one or more consoles as well as for a PC without the need for actual porting.

 

 

Those "re-worked versions of the games" where things like Bump 'N' Jump and many of the other conversions on early consoles, where no access to the original source code was available, and the CPU could not have processed the same program structure and function anyway; so they were re-implemented and re-imagined from scratch to match the capabilities of the target machine.

 

Regardless, as the Wikipedia article suggests, they are still referred to as "ports," whether technically correct or not.

 

In the end, I don't think it matters to make the distinction anyway; since most of the time when people are referring to a "port," their point is to assert that the game existed in another platform entirely beforehand -- not to point out the differences in the underlying code. About the only case I would imagine it to be significant is when you want to point out that the game includes all the nuances (possibly from bugs or limitations) inherent in the original, by virtue of recreating the the exact same structure and function as the original code (e.g., the barrel behaviour of the original DK replicated in DK Arcade based on the algorithm extracted from the code).

 

-dZ.

Edited June 4, 2016 by DZ-Jay

[Games For Your Intellivision]

Tetris I believe started as a computer game and then ended up as an arcade game.

 

I wonder if they 'ported' it or 'converted' it?

 

We tried to get the Tetris rights a few years back and ALMOST did it.

 

Monday is the 32nd anniversary of the game, and I've got the ear of the president of the company through a couple of mutual friends. As a result, we are going to try again.

 

I know just the person who knows a TON of stuff about Tetris to do the 'port'....er...conversion?

 

This is an actual Intellivision title screen. Not a mock up.

[+nurmix]

I see Beamrider being Tempest-like but I think it was inspired by Radar Scope. It could be a just a coincidence; you'd have to ask Tom Loughry. Similarly I think Sub Hunt was inspired by Fire One.

Beamrider is also a bit like Juno First:

http://youtu.be/H81temDNztM

 

Hard to say if it was an influence, since it was released in 1983 (I suppose it's even possible that Beamrider influenced Juno First?). The original idea for Beamrider came from Tom Loughry, although Dave Rolfe programmed it.

 

Sub Hunt was [mostly] programmed by Tom Loughry when he was with APh. There are similarities to the arcade game Fire One, which interestingly, was done by Dave Rolfe!

 

As for the other games mentioned in this thread. I prefer the Intellivision version of BurgerTime. I think it just plays/feels better. And the music in the arcade version bugs me - it can't seem to get out of its own way. Ray Kaestner fixed that in the Intellivision version.

 

Bump N Jump is excellent on the Intellivision, as it is in the arcade. I just never enjoyed the game that much.

 

Donkey Kong / DK /D2K - I enjoy playing Carl's Intellivision versions more than the arcade because of the extras. Nothing at all against the arcade - I still play it on MAME from time to time, just not as much as the Intellivision versions.

 

I find the Coleco Mousetrap and LadyBug enjoyable games to play. They aren't pretty to look at, especially compared to the arcade and Colecovision versions, but they are playable. Carnival.. not so much.

 

Lock N Chase - Intellivision version preferred (8K ROM has better control in my opinion).

 

Locomotion - no real opinion. Haven't played either much. Maybe it's the sliding puzzle play mechanic. It doesn't draw me in. Didn't like Happy Trails for the same reason, even though I was impressed by the idea and implementation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my Intellivision ECS using Intelli-Tapatalk

[+cvga]

I've been playing D2K quite a bit the past 2-3 weeks. I've owned it for a long time but hadn't really spent quality time with it. It's amazing on it's own and even more incredible when I think about how much I despised the version of Donkey Kong that was released for the Intellivision back when I was a kid and so excited to play it.

 

Ironically, I haven't spent as much time playing one game on the Intellivision since I was hooked on Christmas Carol (or maybe Stonix). I love that we have so many talented people working hard to continue to release great games!

[mr_me]

Tetris I believe started as a computer game and then ended up as an arcade game.

 

I wonder if they 'ported' it or 'converted' it?

 

We tried to get the Tetris rights a few years back and ALMOST did it.

 

Monday is the 32nd anniversary of the game, and I've got the ear of the president of the company through a couple of mutual friends. As a result, we are going to try again.

 

I know just the person who knows a TON of stuff about Tetris to do the 'port'....er...conversion?

 

This is an actual Intellivision title screen. Not a mock up.

 

I can't believe someone has a copyright on a simple geometric shape. You can only make five different shapes from combining four squares. Tetris is such a simple game that you don't need to convert the source code; you can reproduce the game just from watching it. Nice tile screen. I always preferred the old PC-DOS version of Tetris to the arcade version. 4-Tris is pretty good too.

[Games For Your Intellivision]

 

I can't believe someone has a copyright on a simple geometric shape. You can only make five different shapes from combining four squares. Tetris is such a simple game that you don't need to convert the source code; you can reproduce the game just from watching it. Nice tile screen. I always preferred the old PC-DOS version of Tetris to the arcade version. 4-Tris is pretty good too.

 

4-tris is 'Tetris like' but doesn't actually follow all the 'rules' of Tetris. This would be an improvement on 4-tris definitely. It would in fact use the spec sheet for the game. I don't know if we'd get source.

 

I'd rather not get into a copyright discussion. The fact is, that there is a reason 4-tris isn't available anymore. Having an official version, playing the complete official game I think would be great.