point and click atari programming

[Jacob Rose]

You say with your nose high in the air. There are a lot of people out there who have a desire to create games for the Atari 2600, but do not have the mental capacity to LEARN what is necessary. In case you didn't know, not all people are alike.

882647[/snapback]

 

If you truly have brain damage and are unable to learn, then you have my sympathy and apologies - otherwise, turn the TV off, log off of the MMORPG, and try, try, try. People generally have the mistaken impression (probably garnered from movies in which a few keystrokes save or doom the world) that science and technology are born whole from sudden strokes of genius, like biblical acts of creation.

 

"Genius is one percent inspiration, and ninety-nine percent perspiration."

Thomas Alva Edison

 

Remember this gem? Well, I think Edison was underestimating the importance of the perspiration.

[+Random Terrain]

You say with your nose high in the air. There are a lot of people out there who have a desire to create games for the Atari 2600, but do not have the mental capacity to LEARN what is necessary. In case you didn't know, not all people are alike.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you truly have brain damage and are unable to learn, then you have my sympathy and apologies - otherwise, turn the TV off, log off of the MMORPG, and try, try, try. People generally have the mistaken impression (probably garnered from movies in which a few keystrokes save or doom the world) that science and technology are born whole from sudden strokes of genius, like biblical acts of creation.

 

"Genius is one percent inspiration, and ninety-nine percent perspiration."

Thomas Alva Edison

 

Remember this gem? Well, I think Edison was underestimating the importance of the perspiration.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There are people like me who have memory problems and other problems, but if you don't count people like me, 'normal' brains are still not the same. Some people are better at concentrating and absorbing knowledge. Having a desire does not mean you'll have the ability. You might have the makings of a great game designer, but if you can't write the code, you're often screwed unless you can find a partner who can program. If someone finally creates a program the average person can use to make their own Atari 2600 games before anyone who cares gets too old, a few people might be able to make some cool stuff. Just like the graphics hacks, most of it will be crap you wouldn't want to waste your time on, but some of it will be worth a look.

Edited December 17, 2007 by Random Terrain

[Tickled_Pink]

There are people like me who have memory problems and other problems, but if you don't count people like me, 'normal' brains are still not the same. Some people are better at concentrating and absorbing knowledge. Having a desire does not mean you'll have the ability. You might have the makings of a great game designer, but if you can't write the code, you're often screwed unless you can find a partner who can program. If someone finally creates a program the average person can use to make their own Atari 2600 games before anyone who cares gets too old, a few people might be able to make some cool stuff. Just like the graphics hacks, most of it will be crap you wouldn't want to waste your time on, but some of it will be worth a look.

 

My short-term memory is very flaky. My present ASP.NET project has taken more than 12 months, whereas it would take a 'normal' person just a few weeks to write. Okay, I had to learn .NET from scratch as well but half the problem's been trying to memorise the language and classes. With a memory like mine, it's not easy.

 

I'd love a tool that would allow easier 2600 programming. I did think about a project like this. From what I can make out, since there are severe limitations to what you can do with a 2600, a game making tool would not need to be 'all-singing, all-dancing" - the programmer would only need a few simple building blocks in order to make a game. The problem for most of us is the timings - a game maker would easily be able to work all the numbers out.

[+Andrew Davie]

Having a desire does not mean you'll have the ability.

883665[/snapback]

 

Persistance is all you need.

Cheers

A

[Thomas Jentzsch]

Persistance is all you need.

I am sure the exists a medical name if you don't have any.

 

MTV-syndrome?

[TMR]

Having a desire does not mean you'll have the ability.

883665[/snapback]

 

Persistance is all you need.

884591[/snapback]

 

A good set of articles [points at a certain person's work =-] and a couple of gurus to bug are also very useful... =-)

[Cybergoth]

Hi there!

 

Persistance is all you need.

I am sure the exists a medical name if you don't have any.

 

You're looking for Attention Deficit Syndrome I think. Oh, wait... Duran² coming @ Live 8...

 

Greetings,

Manuel

[kisrael]

Having a desire does not mean you'll have the ability.

Persistance is all you need.

884591[/snapback]

Not to beat a dead horse, but Andrew, I think you are underestimating the value of your previous experience programming. I'm still standing by my guesstimate of "able to write a semi-passable game in a higher level language" as a baseline for someone undertaking the 2600....admittedly, that bar too can be met via sheer persistence and force of will, but it is a different frame of reference than the non-programmer 2600 enthusiast who wants to make a 2600 game is starting with...

[+batari]

Having a desire does not mean you'll have the ability.

Persistance is all you need.

884591[/snapback]

Not to beat a dead horse, but Andrew, I think you are underestimating the value of your previous experience programming. I'm still standing by my guesstimate of "able to write a semi-passable game in a higher level language" as a baseline for someone undertaking the 2600....admittedly, that bar too can be met via sheer persistence and force of will, but it is a different frame of reference than the non-programmer 2600 enthusiast who wants to make a 2600 game is starting with...

884860[/snapback]

Good point. I wonder if there are any 2600 programmers who didn't previously have oodles of experience in programming?

 

I hesitate to use the term "programmer" because I'm actually an EE m'self and I don't think I'm any exception, since a lot of double-E's are generally not strangers to programming in some form but still "non-programmers" nonetheless.

[Bryan]

It's sorta like going to a mechanic and saying, "Isn't there a tool that will make it easy to fix my own car without having to know how everything works?"

 

Although someone could spend a lot of time developing a simple game creator for the 2600, it would see little use from the development community and would probably only be useful for a handful of unoriginal games. Besides, there are MUCH better platforms for people who want to write games using a simple interface.

 

I'm all for better development tools, though. If someone could write a code editor that can show you on a cycle-by-cycle basis what your kernel will do, that would be great!

 

-Bry

Edited July 2, 2005 by Bryan

[TMR]

Good point.  I wonder if there are any 2600 programmers who didn't previously have oodles of experience in programming?

884873[/snapback]

 

i'd expect not, but that's where the persistence comes in; putting time and energy into learning 6502 on another machine which is friendlier to work with, honing the general skills of game development and then making the move to apply it to the 2600. Chances are that most of the current 2600 programmers have taken a route along these lines and it's one that's still open to anyone who wants to try since there are tools and docs out there for those who want to learn the Atari 8bit series, VIC20, C64, Commodore 264 series, Oric, even the NES - granted, none of those machines will quite prepare you for what the 2600 is going to be like but once the grounding in 6502 is there it takes one pressure away from learning the kit.

 

(For reference, i'm self taught; learnt 6502 on an 8K VIC20, spent time practising on the C64 and now throwing myself at most things with a 6502 or 65816 variant CPU to see what i can do. One day i'll learn Z80! =-)

[Bryan]

Argh. I've done some Z80 stuff and although it has a lot more features, as a 6502 coder I still can't stand it.

 

-Bry

[vdub_bobby]

Good point.  I wonder if there are any 2600 programmers who didn't previously have oodles of experience in programming?

I don't have oodles of experience in programming. I'm going to agree with Andrew Davie on this: persistence is all you need. (And to think you thought it was "love"!)

 

Which obviously means you need a lot of time, as well.

[kisrael]

Good point.  I wonder if there are any 2600 programmers who didn't previously have oodles of experience in programming?

i'd expect not, but that's where the persistence comes in; putting time and energy into learning 6502 on another machine which is friendlier to work with, honing the general skills of game development and then making the move to apply it to the 2600. Chances are that most of the current 2600 programmers have taken a route along these lines and it's one that's still open to anyone who wants to try since there are tools and docs out there for those who want to learn the Atari 8bit series, VIC20, C64, Commodore 264 series, Oric, even the NES - granted, none of those machines will quite prepare you for what the 2600 is going to be like but once the grounding in 6502 is there it takes one pressure away from learning the kit.

To clarify: I wasn't talking about having to have experience with 6502 or other ASM before tackling 2600 (though I do suspect it's Very Useful for "true fluency" that, say, Debro, Thomas, and Andrew seem to have, as opposed to the "just enough of the language to get by" that I make due with). My claim was just that SOME KIND OF GAME PROGRAMMING, Java, Flash, Shockwave, BASIC, PocketC on Palm or WinCE, Javascript, whatever, is a useful and possibly neccesary first step before the 2600. (And reasonably "real" programming would be better than just being handheld with a "Klick and Kreate" -- but if someone made a truly complex game with a handholder, that might do as well, like Lafe Travis' stuff, especially Venture 2.

 

I put myself forward as an example of someone who made the leap from high level to 2600 without coding on other "richer" 8-bit systems. Actually I don't even know if those other 6502-ish platforms have the level of community support that the 2600 does, so it might actually be a harder step.

 

If one's eyes were on the prize of 2600 coding but liked the idea of an intermediate 8-bit platform, Atari 8-bits would be a good bet. Maybe starting with some BASIC then jumping into ASM. There are some useful similarities.

Edited July 5, 2005 by kisrael

[TMR]

Actually I don't even know if those other 6502-ish platforms have the level of community support that the 2600 does, so it might actually be a harder step.

 

Most of the hardware that gets fairly regular new software has a decent community around it, the C64 does very well with several different community sites for different parts of it's community and the Atari 8bit series fares very well here and in Polish on some of the other dedicated boards.

[kisrael]

Actually I don't even know if those other 6502-ish platforms have the level of community support that the 2600 does, so it might actually be a harder step.

Most of the hardware that gets fairly regular new software has a decent community around it, the C64 does very well with several different community sites for different parts of it's community and the Atari 8bit series fares very well here and in Polish on some of the other dedicated boards.

Ah, good to know.

I was thinking about why 2600 programming holds a charm that the 8bit computers don't have, and I realized its because they were programmable all along...even back in the day maybe you could write a game and even get it into one of the magazines, but being able to have physical carts made up is a rather new and novel experience, one that we might have barely imagined back in the day.

[MayDay]

I've been thinking back to when I posted this originally lately, and thought I would weigh in on this subject again. I've told about my experience before in other places here, but will write it again for people who haven't seen it. I took two semesters of C++ and one of Visual Basic, all about 4-5 years ago. This just covered the basics and with the single exception of loops, has really not helped me. In other words, there is no way I could today (or then, for that matter) program a playable game in either language. I looked up my last test in C++, and it was to make a program that would act as a store inventory and track the amount of x item left for 10 different items. The clerk would type something like "sold joystick" and it would have to track that there was one less, and tell the clerk what if any were there upon command. Very basic, and for all intents and purposes I think it is safe to say "I have no previous programming experience".

 

I have spent the last few months really studying all the code, books, tutorials, and old threads posted here to try and learn Assembly. While my efforts have for the most part paid off (at least in the sense of my 2600 coding abilities ) I really don't think most people have the combination of time, motivation, and maybe in some cases the ability to do this if they have never programmed before.

 

So the real question is whether or not this is possible. It was interesting to see how different people responded, and I think in some sense almost everyone who did is correct. The short answer is yes, it can be done... to an extent.

 

The reason a lot of games that exist look similar is because the limitations of the machine forces them to be. So when a new idea came out, other people instantly jumped on that idea and created similar games. You could take a few of these different "genres" (for lack of a better term) and implement them into a code generator. For example, if "multi_sprite_side_scroller" was an option, it could follow games like frogger or freeway. While you couldn't create Go Fish! with this, you could maybe make a game where you are a baby turtle, and have to make it to the ocean (at top of screen) while animals go across the screen looking to "eat" them. Three lives, and you are done. Each time you make one, the game speeds up. Ok, it's lame, but it's still an idea for a similar game.

 

Other "style" games it could recreate:

1. Combat (was mentioned earlier) could become say "ninja" and flip ninja stars instead of 50 mms rounds (even though they look exactly the same). Or, change the sprites to cowboys and change your joystick to a different controller setting and play a western shootout.

2. Space Invaders... into something.

3. Multi-Sprite scroller as mentioned above

4. Side scrolling game where player is at edge of screen. It could be in space, in the air, in water, in a cave, etc. Once this option was picked, those could be further options. Think Chopper command or Armegaddon! where you have to dodge incoming asteroids in order to land on the main body to blow it up... only you never get there

5. maze games (pacman)

6. room based games (adventure)

 

I had came up with a few other generic ideas, but these are the ones that stuck. It would not be possible to really create an "ending" to these games without actually coding one in, so the program would need to keep score and or maybe reset itself if a playfield is "finished" or player is killed. Speaking of Pacman clones, probably forget the dots or the ghosts... probably something two player only.

 

With such limitations, it would be impossible to create anything cart-worthy. I think this tool would have two main uses:

 

1. create a very simple 1 player only with no real AI or 1 vs. 1 game that someone couldn't otherwise create by actually coding it. They could play it on their own computer or burn it off on a cart for themselves. Since these games are really basic (and would be easilly known to have developed from the tool) they shouldn't really be sold to anyone. Or take your new game and post it as a game pitch. If it's already visible, then you know it is possible and you won't be wasting the time of other programmers with something like this.

 

2. a development tool for programmers. This would be a super quick way to see what a game might look like and if it is worthy of your further efforts.

 

I think it's possible and wouldn't be terribly difficult to create, especially if several people worked on it together. One person could create something like the player movement subroutines and this could all be brought together using include files from a javascript creator. It can be done, and I think it would be semi-useful. I'm off to Alabama for up to a week, I'm interested to see what comments will await me upon my return home. I think this would reach a bigger audience than batari's program, but would also not be quite as useful in creating games either. Like everything else, it's always a trade off.

 

-JD