Would you call the Atari2600+ a Atari Flashback model...?

[Spanner]

I was thinking, because it uses the same hardware so in a way its a Atari Flashback model AF12, just without any games or GUI Menu and it made better because its made by PLAION(Like how Sega made there own Mega Drive Mini and stopped ATGames making them, the last MD with SD card was able to read MD cartridges, it would copy it to it menu), its switches are from the Atari Flashback, that probably why it does, it would not work with a Alwinner H6 and you might as well use what's available already, the Atari2600+ is as big as the Atari Flashback 9, I have a AF9(sd card) and AF11(Atari50)(you can plug in a micro USB OTG cable and it can read from a USB Stick, it plugs into its power connector), I bought a Atari50 Flashback Gold when I prerordered this last year.

 

ATGames have a habit of using the same GUI menu on all there consoles, ATGames MD with sd card has the same GUI as the Atari Flashback and Legends Flashback consoles and they all use the same background music.

[+LS650]

No.

[scifidude79]

My 2600+ is on the way, but I've owned two Atari Flashback consoles. In fact, I still have the Atari Flashback 50 Gold. Not a single one of them would take any of my 50+ Atari 2600 cartridges, where the 2600+ will. So, no, the 2600+ isn't a Flashback console. The Flashback consoles are cool for what they are, but nothing beats being able to use those old cartridges that many of us have laying about.

[Tavi]

19 minutes ago, scifidude79 said:

My 2600+ is on the way, but I've owned two Atari Flashback consoles. In fact, I still have the Atari Flashback 50 Gold. Not a single one of them would take any of my 50+ Atari 2600 cartridges, where the 2600+ will. So, no, the 2600+ isn't a Flashback console. The Flashback consoles are cool for what they are, but nothing beats being able to use those old cartridges that many of us have laying about.

You are not actually playing your old cartridges though when inserting them into a 2600+ though. When inserting a cartridge into a 2600+, it reads then creates a dump file of what was inserted. Then it executes that file.

While using old cartridges is a nice nod to nostalgia, it is functionally no different then a Flashback unit reading the same file either from internal memory or off a SD card.

It is still emulation, just with extra steps.

I can see the appeal of the unit to some, but to myself it is basically just another variation of the dozen Flashback models that preceded it.

Edited November 30, 2023 by Tavi
typo

[Spanner]

I would now say its based on it because it uses the same hardware so this would not exist without it been made first, I do not understand why ATGames never made one with a cartridge slot, they had the technology to make one, all they needed to do was to adopt there Mega Drive Slot thats on there Mega Drive with SD card from 2018/2019.

Edited November 30, 2023 by Spanner

[CapitanClassic]

3 hours ago, Spanner said:

do not understand why ATGames never made one with a cartridge slot, they had the technology to make one

Manufacturing costs. While the parts might be cheap (relatively ports and ribbon cable are not), a Pick n Place machine likely couldn’t mount the cartridge port (it wouldn’t be able to connect the ribbon cable at least). The cost of Chinese laborers is multiple times more expensive than surface mount parts.

[Video]

I would say no. It uses actual carts, and has no inbuilt games. Even if the hardware is architecturally similar, I'd still count the plus as a different category.

[+swlovinist]

Different in my book.    

[scifidude79]

10 hours ago, Tavi said:

You are not actually playing your old cartridges though when inserting them into a 2600+ though. When inserting a cartridge into a 2600+, it reads then creates a dump file of what was inserted. Then it executes that file.

While using old cartridges is a nice nod to nostalgia, it is functionally no different then a Flashback unit reading the same file either from internal memory or off a SD card.

It is still emulation, just with extra steps.

I can see the appeal of the unit to some, but to myself it is basically just another variation of the dozen Flashback models that preceded it.

Yes, I know how it works. I have years of experience using products like this. I own both the Retron5 and AtGames' HD Sega Genesis that take cartridges and dump the ROM into the unit's RAM and execute the ROM file using emulation. I also own system on a chip clones that run the games from the cartridges. However, I never said it runs the game directly off of the cartridge, I said it takes the cartridges. It's a nostalgia thing for those of us who grew up with cartridge games and remember the fun (and sometimes frustration) of switching cartridges to change games. It's not the same as hitting a menu or home screen button to go back to a list of games and selecting a different game to play. The fact that the game runs using emulation makes no difference to many of us who like cartridges. Besides, you still need the cartridges to make it work, as there are no games loaded onto it and no way of loading games onto it without cartridges.

 

Also, in terms of AtGames, their emulation can be dicey sometimes. That HD Sega Genesis I have from them is a decent unit, but it can have emulation errors. There's no support for it, I'm stuck with it the way it is. Atari is determined to make every cartridge work on the 2600+ and plans to release firmware updates to add compatibility and fix issues. That's vastly different from what AtGames has done time and time again.

[John Stamos Mullet]

No. It's a "faithful to a point" 2600 reboot.

 

The flashbacks are mostly cheap, poorly emulated "NoAC" emulating the 2600/7800 if it was portend to NES and then pushed through a meat grinder consoles.

[+karri]

The Atari 7800 was never really popular in Europe. A console vs a "real" computer with a keyboard tipped the scale against the Atari 7800.

 

The 2600+ opens up new means to play Atari 7800 games. So I believe that there will be more interest to develop games for the Atari 7800 thanks to the 2600+. At least I plan to release a new game on the 17th of December in the 2023 jam. It should be a dual release on the Atari Lynx and the Atari 7800. Hopefully you can also run it on the 2600+ by Xmas. (if there is a new firmware by then...)

[scifidude79]

The 7800 compatibility is one of the biggest selling points for me with the 2600+. I have so many fond memories of playing the 7800 as a kid. The only Flashback model that even offered 7800 games was the first one, I believe. That one was even modeled after the 7800, before they switched to using the 2600 form factor.

[Mockduck]

The 2600+ is a new record player, the Flashbacks and Gamestation Pros of the world are pre-loaded mp3 players. There's a difference in putting on a record versus hitting play on an MP3, there's a difference between the experience of plugging in carts versus hitting play on pre-loaded games. Maybe mostly experiential, but that's ultimately what it's about anyway.

[+Gemintronic]

It's an emulation box.  So, the real comparison is between emulators used and their features.  Also, the track record of updates and community enhancements.

 

I'd argue that a Flashback portable with SD/TF card slot is pretty close albeit without cartridge slot.  But, AtGames has a terrible reputation with updates.

[+Nathan Strum]

51 minutes ago, Mockduck said:

The 2600+ is a new record player, the Flashbacks and Gamestation Pros of the world are pre-loaded mp3 players. There's a difference in putting on a record versus hitting play on an MP3, there's a difference between the experience of plugging in carts versus hitting play on pre-loaded games.

But it's a record player that doesn't play all of your LPs. Not just shiny new ones from Taylor Swift either - it won't play some that are 40 years old. Would you buy a record player that couldn't play your original, mint copy of Journey's Escape?

 

(There's a joke in there about not supporting all of your 78's too, but I'm not sure what it is.)

 

As far as I'm concerned, the 2600+ is another Flashback. A more polished-looking one, and a more pricey one, but until or unless Atari makes one that has 100% parity with original hardware in terms of compatibility, that's all it will ever be: a half-implemented nostalgia cash-in. I won't consider it or any of its successors to be a true "2600", until it actually works like one. That's strictly my opinion, and maybe the cost of doing that isn't worth it to Atari for a retail product, but if that's the case, then what they choose to ship as a retail product isn't worth my money either.

[THX-1138]

No.

[John Stamos Mullet]

34 minutes ago, Nathan Strum said:

But it's a record player that doesn't play all of your LPs. Not just shiny new ones from Taylor Swift either - it won't play some that are 40 years old. Would you buy a record player that couldn't play your original, mint copy of Journey's Escape?

 

(There's a joke in there about not supporting all of your 78's too, but I'm not sure what it is.)

 

As far as I'm concerned, the 2600+ is another Flashback. A more polished-looking one, and a more pricey one, but until or unless Atari makes one that has 100% parity with original hardware in terms of compatibility, that's all it will ever be: a half-implemented nostalgia cash-in. I won't consider it or any of its successors to be a true "2600", until it actually works like one. That's strictly my opinion, and maybe the cost of doing that isn't worth it to Atari for a retail product, but if that's the case, then what they choose to ship as a retail product isn't worth my money either.

*currently doesn’t play them. The vast majority of incompatibilities will be sorted out in a firmware update in the near future. 

[KainXavier]

The 2600+ is a clone console.  The Flashback devices are not.  The only one that comes close is the Flashback 2 since it uses 2600 hardware, and even then it has to be modified to accept cartridges.

[scifidude79]

3 minutes ago, KainXavier said:

The 2600+ is a clone console.

That's exactly what it is. A system on a chip clone console. The fact that it doesn't run the cartridges on hardware, but instead on emulation, doesn't alter this. The fact that they use emulation just makes it easier to add to the compatibility. If you look at clone consoles through the years, it took multiple device versions to get full compatibility for a lot of them, and some still aren't there. (you can't play some games on NES clone consoles) Atari has the advantage of being able to tweak things and add compatibility via firmware updates. The thing is, some cartridges use special chips to add hardware features that aren't on the console. Those are usually the ones that give clone consoles the most trouble.

 

Though, I got my 2600+ earlier today and I tested 63 vintage 2600 cartridges on it, and all 63 run. So, it has 100% compatibility with my cartridge collection. I had to clean some of them to get them running, but they all work.

[+KaeruYojimbo]

2 hours ago, Nathan Strum said:

Would you buy a record player that couldn't play your original, mint copy of Journey's Escape?

I might actually pay extra for that feature.

[atwwong]

On 11/29/2023 at 12:41 PM, Spanner said:

I was thinking, because it uses the same hardware so in a way its a Atari Flashback model AF12...

There already is an AF12.

[CapitanClassic]

 

Clone doesn't mean software emulation. If it did, then any virtual machine you run on any system would make that system a clone system. Would anyone seriously claim that the Amiga was a IBM PC clone, or an Atari ST clone?

 

Clones don't use emulation. They are silicone (or FPGA arguably)

 

Clone - a computer designed to simulate exactly the operation of another, typically more expensive, model.

 

Emulate - reproduce the function or action of (a different computer, software system)

Edited December 2, 2023 by CapitanClassic

[scifidude79]

Oh, I think I do know what that word means. Cloning in the video game industry is an old term that goes back to the 1970s and can refer to both hardware or software cloning. Atari is definitely well aware of the term, since clones of their hardware and software have been appearing since Pong became popular. In more recent years, it's been used a lot to refer to consoles that mimic the functionality of other consoles. The 2600+ mimics the functionality of the original 2600. Though, since it's an official Atari product, calling it a clone isn't really fair. It's not a clone, or a Flashback, which was a licensed product. It's an Atari 2600.

[KainXavier]

9 hours ago, CapitanClassic said:

Clone doesn't mean software emulation. If it did, then any virtual machine you run on any system would make that system a clone system. Would anyone seriously claim that the Amiga was a IBM PC clone, or an Atari ST clone?

 

Clones don't use emulation. They are silicone (or FPGA arguably)

 

Clone - a computer designed to simulate exactly the operation of another, typically more expensive, model.

 

Emulate - reproduce the function or action of (a different computer, software system)

If the operating system is designed to mimic the functionality of and run the same software as another operating system, then yes, I would call it a clone.  For instance, ReactOS is a Windows clone.  Also, if we're talking about virtual machines, WINE is included in that list, and WINE is short for "WINE Is Not an Emulator".

Moreover, the 2600+, the Flashback series, and even FPGA-based devices like the Analogue Pocket are all emulation devices.  The distinguishing factor, in this context at least, is what each device is trying to emulate.  The Flashback series has always been about replicating the experience of playing games on original hardware.  The 2600+ and the Pocket are designed to replicate the hardware itself.  It doesn't matter if one device uses a software-based approach versus a hardware-based one.  It also doesn't matter if the end result is largely the same.  They're different design philosophies.  Hence, why I refer to the 2600+ as a clone console.

Edited December 2, 2023 by KainXavier
Revised last paragraph.

[CapitanClassic]

Whatever.

Quote

"Can a Commodore 64 emulate MS-DOS?" Yes, it's possible for a [Commodore] 64 to emulate an IBM PC [which uses MS-DOS], in the same sense that it's possible to bail out Lake Michigan with a teaspoon.

— Letter to Compute! and editorial answer, April 1988[1]