The RetroConsole: 2600 Edition

[Vigo]

Hmmm, i think with expanding the TIA hardware achitecture comes great responsibility. Unlike the Cuttle Cart, which is just a Hardware addition, you are forming some kind of a quasi standard, continuing someone else´s work and which won´t be downwards compatible, rendering every original piece of hardware obsolete. I would find it really frustrating not being able to start the newest development on the one and only original hardware.

 

Why did you chose the Atari as a coding Platform? I think one of its greatest potentials lies in its limitations, encouraging you to develop ultra optimized piece of code, showing the world what a 26 year(!) old machine can still do.

 

If you are trying to enhance the hardware, wouldn´t this be like taking the "magic" away?

 

I´m really interested in how the others here think about it.

[mos6507]

I'm not as inclined to change the internal architecture because there are already the Atari 400/800/5200, the 7800, and the Amiga which are all descendants of the 2600. Once you start adding in features to the 2600 you start to duplicate the R&D that led to these machines.

 

I draw the line at the cart and controller signals, though. From there on anything goes as far as I'm concerned.

 

I think having the capabilities of a DPC chip and a Cuttle-Cart would greatly expand what this thing could do with new homebrews.

 

I've felt for a long time that someone should make a DPC clone and offer it as some kind of pass-through device that could be used with new games.

 

I don't know how practical a truly general purpose DPC can be because for each game it seems like it has to wedge itself between the ROM and the console. I don't know how easily you could make a RAM-loadable or ROM stackable DPC.

 

I think the only proper way to add in features, if you are going to do that, would be to do it in such a way that the game autodetects what it's running under and can run properly with or without the new hardware (kind of like an N64 RAM Pack game). And I don't really mean stacking two 4K games into one cart side by side. Preferably I mean using up unused registers or bits in registers on the 2600 in such a way that do nothing on old hardware but add some extra flash or polish on the TIA+.

 

This could be the fine scroll on the playfield that was discussed, or maybe a true stereo pan for each sound channel. Something that the game wouldn't need to be playable on the original hardware, but which would be a nice extra touch.

[Cybergoth]

Hi there!

 

I think the only proper way to add in features, if you are going to do that, would be to do it in such a way that the game autodetects what it's running under and can run properly with or without the new hardware (kind of like an N64 RAM Pack game).  And I don't really mean stacking two 4K games into one cart side by side.  Preferably I mean using up unused registers or bits in registers on the 2600 in such a way that do nothing on old hardware but add some extra flash or polish on the TIA+.

 

Why limit it to gimmick stuff? Add in two more sprites and a whole new world opens, yet the overall look and feel would still be 2600.

 

I just don't see anyone wanting to run crippled TIA+ games on stock hardware anyway, so why compromise here?

 

As for setting a new standart: It certainly does. So this should indeed be very carefull descissions. Not that some future day there's 10 different TIA+ specs, all incompatible to each other. All should be very carefully evaluated and discussed openly.

 

Greetings,

Manuel

[Cybergoth]

Hi there!

 

Why limit it to gimmick stuff? Add in two more sprites and a whole new world opens, yet the overall look and feel would still be 2600.

 

Whoa! Ultimate solution:

 

Have the complete TIA doubled!

 

The TIA registers are shadowed anyway, so why not internally split that into two different TIAs?

 

The original games would either use the first or the second TIA, not even noticing the difference.

 

Yet any TIA+ programmer can use 4 sprites, 4 sound channels, etc.! Woohoo!

 

Greetings,

Manuel

[+Andrew Davie]

I´m really interested in how the others here think about it.

 

 

I am totally against the idea! If you're going to extend the TIA, then why not just design a completely new console altogether. Because that's really what it will be - it won't be a '2600 anymore. I want to program things that will sit on a simple cartridge and plug into an original machine, and give the user the experience they could have had in the '80s but with software of the next century.

 

Cheers

A

[Cybergoth]

Hi there!

 

Andrew, you said:

I am totally against the idea!

 

and

 

I want to program things that will sit on a simple cartridge and plug into an original machine, and give the user the experience they could have had in the '80s but with software of the next century.

 

I don't understand why you are saying that you are totally against the idea. Basically you can do the second any time, as long as it's granted that the TIA+ is 100% compatible. Even if it's not, you can opt for a stock machine. All the TIA+ should do is offering an option. If you don't want to program it, don't do it.

 

No one forces you to program games using the extended possibilities of a SC or CC either, yet you are not against the idea of these things *existing*, or? (Or a 256K Tiger Vision BS scheme for example... )

 

Greetings,

Manuel

[vb_master]

retrocon, how are you going to assemble 100 of these? If your not using surface mount stuff, I can help!

[Vigo]

No one forces you to program games using the extended possibilities of a SC or CC either, yet you are not against the idea of these things *existing*, or? (Or a 256K Tiger Vision BS scheme for example... )

 

The point is that CC´s are expansion carts for existing classic Ataris, so in theory, every Atari owner can profit from their features.

 

Right now we are talking about a complete new system. By expanding this system and hoping that homebrewers will write games for it, you are excluding the people who own and love their classic Ataris, hence splitting the community.

 

And i really ask myself: what´s the point in adding extra features? You want better gfx: get a GBA. Adding features would completely destroy the design philosophy behind the TIA: efficient simplicity. Would a VCS game with more sprites, more colours, better sound still be a VCS game? I don´t think so.

 

I know: the technical geek in us would be fascinated by having extra features to play with. But it is also important asking ourselves what this whole retro gaming and developing is all about. Is it about preserving and honouring the past, or altering it, making it something which it never has been like.

 

Think about it.

[krisjohn]

I say go for it, add the extra features.

 

Most people play the new 2600 games on emulators anyway and they can be similarly enhanced.

 

As I said, I'd buy one of your new VCSs if it's Cuttle Cart Compatible.

 

It might fragment the fan base a little, but I can't imagine it would have a net negative effect on the scene.

 

Anyway, who are we to deny you a very valid selling point?

[Cybergoth]

Hi there!

 

The point is that CC´s are expansion carts for existing classic Ataris, so in theory, every Atari owner can profit from their features.

 

My point is that a CC was $100...

 

Right now we are talking about a complete new system.

 

...while we're talking $50 here.

 

Besides. It is a complete new system anyway. And you'd get the "+" for free.

 

By expanding this system and hoping that homebrewers will write games for it, you are excluding the people who own and love their classic Ataris, hence splitting the community.

 

Again: Nonsense. Is the scene splitted between the people using the SC and the ones who don't?

 

And i really ask myself: what´s the point in adding extra features?

 

My, if you don't get the point here, ignore it. It won't bite you.

 

You want better gfx: get a GBA.

 

Thanks, I already have two of them. Also three dozen other consoles with better gfx.

 

Adding features would completely destroy the design philosophy behind the TIA: efficient simplicity. Would a VCS game with more sprites, more colours, better sound still be a VCS game? I don´t think so.

 

See. That's where I think different. A good game is a good game is a good game is a good game. I don't care about which target it is running on. But from a programmers point of view it'd be cool to have a more powerful TIA to toy with.

 

I know: the technical geek in us would be fascinated by having extra features to play with.

 

This is the one sentence I can 100% agree

 

But it is also important asking ourselves what this whole retro gaming and developing is all about. Is it about preserving and honouring the past, or altering it, making it something which it never has been like.

 

Again, I don't care about this at all. What's the point about having do's and don'ts in your hobby? Someone tries to improve the TIA inner workings because it's fun to him, someone else programms a game using these enhancements because it's fun to him and here comes a third ruining it for both, because of some law and order of the retro gaming scene or what?

 

I don't get the whole point of this general anti-stance. I mean, if you don't like it, don't buy it, or? Actually, and also again: When it's 100% compatible to all original software why don't just ignore the extra features?

 

Like every C128 user ignoring the C128 mode...

 

You can also buy a PS2 and only play PS1 games with it, if you like. Nobody will stop you from doing so.

 

Actually the GBA was also a perfect example. It has a complete GB/GBC built in, inclusive extra Z80 CPU, right? You're perfectly safe to just play that old stuff with it. If you aren't interested in the "Advance" games, ignore them...

 

At best I see a parallel to a C64 modded with Super CPUs. Way cool. I'd love to program a VCS modded with a super CPU as well.

 

Greetings,

Manuel

[Vigo]

You seem to forget that this project is intended as a retro gaming console. Thus, your comparison with the PS2 or the GBA lacks a lot, because THEIR primary purpose is to be next-gen consoles, making the backward compatibility just an extra feature.

 

Mentioning the C128, you yourself gave the best example why it is just a waste of developing time and energy to add extra features: the larger user and softwarebase wins. This made the C128 a failed project. They better could have shipped it with 64K ram, no Z80 and no VDC, because its only advantage was the build-in floppy and seperate keyboard (C128Ds).

 

That´s why i have resentiments against these extra features: they delay the project, hardly anyone will use them, because the larger userbase are VCS owners, and they are meaningless, because they will be easily outperformed by already existing platforms. The TIA already had its successors.

 

The best features concerning hardware additions are already planned: flash memory for storing the whole game palette onto one single card, NTSC/PAL compatibility, connecting modern game controllers to it, etc...

 

THESE are the arguments which will sell this console, not adding a strange proprietary sub-standard of a established system.

 

You name it: a game is a game is a game. And the VCS has great games.

[Cybernoid]

Have you seen this project?

 

http://www.mindspring.com/~2600onachip/index.html

 

http://atariage.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t...ht=2600+onachip

 

Collaboration with Carlos may be useful.

[krisjohn]

Th C128 may have been a failed commercial project, but that's not to say that hobbyists ignored it completely. For example, I'm sure there were plenty of people that ran a BBS on a C128 that they couldn't have run on a C64.

 

Another example: Not everyone had Super Gameboy adapters for the SNESs, but that didn't stop games designers adding support for the extended palette, boarder and extra controllers.

 

But your point about it being a retro gaming console is valid. Perhaps it should just be a 7800 and be done with it.

[retrocon]

I see that some people are upset about the idea of creating a tweaked tia+. I don't really see the problem with it myself.

 

It won't harm the 2600 fan base in any way or split the community. Look at how strong this community is and the console was released 25 years ago or so. If it can survive and prosper after this long, it will survive anything.

 

Any activity that involves the system is good. Whether that be creating new homebrew games, creating new hardware or hardware modifications, repairing systems, writing technical documents, posting articles on this forum or even just playing the games. It is all good. It brings people together and gives them new and exciting things to think about and toy with. It keeps the dream alive!

 

Plus I think we are talking about a few tweaks here. If you trick out your corolla with a chrome V8 and a spoiler, its still a toyota and not suddenly a ferrari

 

Imagine how cool it would be to just add in a couple things to the tia and suddenly open up some new and exciting possibilities. Even if the homebrewers don't use these features, it gives the hardware oriented guys something to dream about and play with. Maybe a few demos will come out to show off what could have been.

 

Seems like harmless fun for those lusting to get under the hood....

[krisjohn]

Plus I think we are talking about a few tweaks here. If you trick out your corolla with a chrome V8 and a spoiler, its still a toyota and not suddenly a ferrari

I think this is getting close to the point. The thing is, this isn't a modification or expansion for an existing 2600, it's a new 2600. Sort of like buying a new corolla with a chrome V8 and a spoiler.

 

Modifying existing hardware is cool. If someone produced a pass-through cart with an extra 6K of RAM that new games could access you'd still be running the games on an old 2600, just an expanded one. Like a 2600 with a Supercharger or a C64 with a SuperCPU.

 

Building a whole new 2600 with new features is an unresolved debate.

 

@ retrocon: Why don't you just build-in an extra 6k of RAM in a similar way that the Supercharger worked? That would give you an existing software base of sorts (Thomas Jentzsch could probably convert the Supercharger games to cart fairly easily ) while producing a modern product with expanded features that current 2600 programmers could write for.

[Cybergoth]

Hi there!

 

@ retrocon: Why don't you just build-in an extra 6k of RAM in a similar way that the Supercharger worked?  That would give you an existing software base of sorts (Thomas Jentzsch could probably convert the Supercharger games to cart fairly easily ) while producing a modern product with expanded features that current 2600 programmers could write for.

 

Another good point. Why is no programmer exploiting the extra features of the SC or CC right now?

 

- Because you can't release anything for it on a cartridge with your name on it. You can't show it your friends and tell them "look here, what I've done". The original 2600 experience is plugging a game cartridge in and both the CC and SC don't give you that.

 

But expanding the RAM within the hardware would make me use it. Be it on the cartridge or in the console doesn't matter.

 

As for the retro aspect: Retro programmers try to outdo the original games and retro hardware guys try to outdo the original hardware.

 

It's natural. If everyone was fine with the original hardware there wouldn't be any homebrew hardware at all. Everyone here mods the video output of his console for a better signal. Or splits the audio signal in stereo. And I don't think the TIA is untouchable.

 

And wether any enhancements may add to the sales or not, they certainly won't harm them either. Also I dare to assume that sales numbers are probably not the main motivation factor for such a project...

 

Skeleton+ is taking advantage of the stereo mod, as A-VCS-Tec Challenge does. They support an estimated user base of... hm... ~5 guys?

 

Thomas did tank control versions of a few games for selfmade 2-joystick tank controlers for ~1 guy?

 

Who cares about customers and user base, as long as you are enjoying what you're doing?

 

Greetings,

Manuel

[Video]

Damn, looks like somebody dropped a bombshell in here.

 

Personally, as long as your New atari will run all my favorite games, extra features are cool, though for a system that won't sell that much (though I imagine it will sell far more than games do, cause people like me want new backups) After all, a lot of what could be added could be done ALA Super GameBoy Style, you know, complete backwards compatibility to the original system, but if used on this one, it may have more colors, smoother scrolling, etc.

 

In fact, a 2X option (which I've seen a lot of people seemed happy about) would essentually give you more power. Think about it. 2X speed on all those text games? Pac-Man? Etc? They wouldn't flicker anymore. (or as badly) A game could be written to run at half speed (via option ofcourse) and when run at 2X on the new system, would appear to be less flickery, show more sprites, smoother scrolling, etc, when in all reality, what you did was drop the game down to half speed.

 

In fact, if you added nothing to the TIA at all, beyond a 2X speed capability, that alone could add nearly limitless possibilities. Hey, Andrew Davie (sorry if I spelled that wrong) What about Chronocolor Interleving? The Chronocolor it self could run at full speed, the sprites run at half speed, and on a 2X Tia, what would that do to the flicker that's so noticable on a PC, and less so on a TV? It would make it genuinely almost nonexistant, as far as the game player is concerned. And all it would do is envolve adding a few bits of data so you can switch some of the time registers to half speed (escentually, a slowmo code)

 

Personally, I think that is an awesome Idea, don't mind the people here Retrocon, you know how people can get if you start changing a classic. Personally, as I said, as long as it plays all my current games, you could have an X-Box running in there, I wouldn't mind. Just don't get discouraged or anything, cause I'm serious, if none of the extra's ever see any use at all, I think there's enough people who'd be happy to buy one just to have a new Atari.

 

Put me down for one(I'd want more, but I don't know if I could get money for more) Thanks for listening.

[moycon]

PM sent.

 

Would be very interesting to see photos of the work in progress....Even if it was just design sketches. Concept art, Coffee Ringed Paperwork....

[Vigo]

As for the retro aspect: Retro programmers try to outdo the original games and retro hardware guys try to outdo the original hardware.

 

It is very easy to outdo the TIA, but is this the whole point behind being a RETRO hardware guy?

 

It's natural. If everyone was fine with the original hardware there wouldn't be any homebrew hardware at all. Everyone here mods the video output of his console for a better signal. Or splits the audio signal in stereo. And I don't think the TIA is untouchable.

 

Doing a composite mod on the hardware doesn´t create two different standards, it is just taking advantage of what the TIA always could do. Touching the TIA is creating a new system, hence against the idea of a retro console.

 

And wether any enhancements may add to the sales or not, they certainly won't harm them either. Also I dare to assume that sales numbers are probably not the main motivation factor for such a project...

 

Then how do you want to be able financing this whole product, especially making it $50 cheap? If sales numbers wouldn´t be the motivation factor, why did Carlos for example changed his mind in releasing his project for free, as originally planned?

 

Skeleton+ is taking advantage of the stereo mod, as A-VCS-Tec Challenge does. They support an estimated user base of... hm... ~5 guys?

 

Thomas did tank control versions of a few games for selfmade 2-joystick tank controlers for ~1 guy?

 

Both solutios are downward compatible (in Thomas case, alternate versions with same gfx and gameplay exists). Making special TIA+ games won´t (if the TIA+ really outdos the original in a significant way) be downward compatible, they would have to be PORTED to the VCS.

 

Who cares about customers and user base, as long as you are enjoying what you're doing?

 

Greetings,

Manuel

 

Ok, denying the responsibility you have when you try to resurrect and change a well defined product, which has never changed during its lifespan.

 

Nevertheless, retrocon is the engineer, and if he wants to add extra gimmicks to the TIA, he will do it, no one of us has the right to deny him this right.

[Cybergoth]

Hi there!

 

Then how do you want to be able financing this whole product, especially making it $50 cheap?

 

Well, I don't know. As it's not my project. I'd assume you sum up the parts costs, add $10 for assembling the thing and if you're

 

If sales numbers wouldn´t be the motivation factor, why did Carlos for example changed his mind in releasing his project for free, as originally planned?

 

That's an attidtude I don't like at all. How far would he've come with this project if guys like Dan Boris, Bob Colbert, Eckhard Stolberg and all others had been hiding their knowledge from the public?

 

Greetings,

Manuel

[Thomas Jentzsch]

As for the retro aspect: Retro programmers try to outdo the original games and retro hardware guys try to outdo the original hardware.

Yup, but IMO there is a difference if you try to squeeze out the best game or picture/audio quality out of existing hardware or just update it.

 

Expanding the hardware is no big deal more than 25 years after it was developed.

 

It's natural. If everyone was fine with the original hardware there wouldn't be any homebrew hardware at all. Everyone here mods the video output of his console for a better signal. Or splits the audio signal in stereo. And I don't think the TIA is untouchable.

I would call that optimizing, not changing the hardware. But using an "expanded" TIA for cooler graphics would IMO be like cheating. And where is the challenge then?

 

Thomas did tank control versions of a few games for selfmade 2-joystick tank controlers for ~1 guy?

2

[Cybergoth]

Hi there!

 

Yup, but IMO there is a difference if you try to squeeze out the best game or picture/audio quality out of existing hardware or just update it.

 

Agreed.

 

Expanding the hardware is no big deal more than 25 years after it was developed.

 

Agreed²

 

I would call that optimizing, not changing the hardware. But using an "expanded" TIA for cooler graphics would IMO be like cheating. And where is the challenge then?

 

Agreed³

 

But just assuming I'm no longer interested in the challenge at all and just want to do better games, what we have here is a *chance*

 

A chance of expanding out the *known* environment to something new, yet familiar. I like the control you have on the VCS by writing your own kernel. You get that on almost no other machine. What I don't like is the limit of 2 sprites. Whatever you'd like to do has to compromise here and I'm somewhat tired of doing that.

 

Greetings,

Manuel

[Cootster]

It seems that by expanding the TIA, but not to the extent to which the 7800 runs, it is indeed creating a third standard (can't call it 52, so why not call it the 6200?)

 

So why shouldn't it just start off as a 7800 that, like the originals, plays 2600 games? Then the full cart library for both systems would play on it, homebrewers for both would be happy . . .

 

Also, is the current plan going to be compatible with the Supercharger? Let's face it, tapes are cheaper than carts . . . They can be backed up far easier . . . The only problem is that there aren't enough actual Superchargers around . . . Someone, somewhere should fix this . . . 2600-on-a-chip built into a SC player with controller ports and a vestigial cart hole . . . That I'd buy instantly . . .

 

This one, I want, even more so since my Vader bit the dust, but . . . no, aside from possibly being able to run new games under a new standard that a lot of HBers wouldn't support, this is, well, a clone . . . It doesn't grab me . . .

[RCmodeler]

IDEA:

 

Put all 1000 games on to a separate FPGA. That eliminates the need for bulky cartridge slots.

 

 

 

 

 

Like every C128 user ignoring the C128 mode...

Good point. If the developer added TIA+ or any other enhanced features, they'd likely be ignored..... just as the enhanced features of the C=128 were largely ignored.

[Cybergoth]

Hi there!

 

Like every C128 user ignoring the C128 mode...

Good point. If the developer added TIA+ or any other enhanced features, they'd likely be ignored..... just as the enhanced features of the C=128 were largely ignored.

 

Certainly. I'm realistic about that. I just don't see it as a problem. Wether it's someone wasting his time with inventing such a thing or me wasting time programming such a thing, why is this a problem worth debating for someone else?

 

It's just opening an option, wether it's used or not. I'd rather like to have the technical possibilites discussed, not marketing problems. No 2600 programmer tell me that he has never dreamed something like "Ahhh if I just could do this or that..."

 

Well here is a unique chance of tweaking a console hardware a little bit closer to our dreams. Or my dreams, if I'm the only one thinking so

 

Greetings,

Manuel