+FujiSkunk Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 You'd have to ask Curt that question. IIRC, there was an art school contest for some of these games (not all) and many only resembled what a 2600 game would be. Only a handful of the people who developed them know machine language which leads me to believe they were not tested in that manner. 913329[/snapback] I don't know, this seems to contradict everything we've heard about the FB2 so far. Nothing Curt Vendell has said has suggested that the new games are running on different hardware, and he has been emphatic that 2600-compatible hardware is in the system, compatible enough that a real cartridge port can be connected to it. If I may ask, where are you getting the idea that the new games are not truly 2600-compatible? Data encryption wouldn't be enough to convince me. If the game code is stored with encryption, it would be trivial to have a key chip decrypt the code before the 2600 chip sees it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZylonBane Posted August 17, 2005 Author Share Posted August 17, 2005 Your argument lost all credence with me the second you resorted to personal insults. And your argument lost all credence the second you started spreading blatant disinformation about the FB2 and exhibiting confusion over what a database is. Besides which, wouldn't you rather have personalized insults than boring impersonal ones? That's hand-crafted quality right there. No two the same! Great stocking-stuffers! Eh, I'm going home now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sku_u Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Your argument lost all credence with me the second you resorted to personal insults. And your argument lost all credence the second you started spreading blatant disinformation about the FB2 and exhibiting confusion over what a database is. That's a good one. What a great debater you are. I guess you know everything about everything (that IS how you come across). Maybe someday you'll actually create something since you claim to know so much more than everyone else instead of being the miserable wretch in the community who lacks social skills to such a degree that he must spew sarcastic to semi-serious insults everywhere around him. Let's see you put out a few homebrews Mr. Atari programming and hardware authority. Or perhaps build a database and website of your own about classing gaming. Until then, STFU! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cybergoth Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 Hi there! It's a pretty unique situation. They are new 2600 games, but they are part of a standalone product and not available to play on classic 2600 hardware. I think we already have similar games listed in the database, like the AD&D games for example. They probably should get added at some point, but not sure yet how they would be classified (probably something like "D" for Dedicated console). They definitely should. "D" Sounds good to me. Greetings, Manuel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jentzsch Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 They definitely should. "D" Sounds good to me. Yup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+FujiSkunk Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 Your argument lost all credence with me the second you resorted to personal insults. And your argument lost all credence the second you started spreading blatant disinformation about the FB2 and exhibiting confusion over what a database is. That's a good one. What a great debater you are. Speaking of debating, you still haven't answered my question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jentzsch Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 IIRC, there was an art school contest for some of these games (not all) and many only resembled what a 2600 game would be. Only a handful of the people who developed them know machine language which leads me to believe they were not tested in that manner. I am 100.000000% sure, non of these games are included on FB2. They all where just looking like Atari 2600 games (at best). But there was no compatible code involved. That's for sure. The new games included should run on old hardware, unless the developers had to change something due to incompatibilities of the new hardware. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sku_u Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 IIRC, there was an art school contest for some of these games (not all) and many only resembled what a 2600 game would be. Only a handful of the people who developed them know machine language which leads me to believe they were not tested in that manner. I am 100.000000% sure, non of these games are included on FB2. They all where just looking like Atari 2600 games (at best). But there was no compatible code involved. That's for sure. The new games included should run on old hardware, unless the developers had to change something due to incompatibilities of the new hardware. 913802[/snapback] Ah, I see. I'm glad someone else here remembered what I was talking about. I was under the impression that the contest was sponsored by Atari for the new FB2. I'm glad to hear that those games were not included in the final product. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keilbaca Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 (edited) IIRC, there was an art school contest for some of these games (not all) and many only resembled what a 2600 game would be. Only a handful of the people who developed them know machine language which leads me to believe they were not tested in that manner. I am 100.000000% sure, non of these games are included on FB2. They all where just looking like Atari 2600 games (at best). But there was no compatible code involved. That's for sure. The new games included should run on old hardware, unless the developers had to change something due to incompatibilities of the new hardware. 913802[/snapback] Ah, I see. I'm glad someone else here remembered what I was talking about. I was under the impression that the contest was sponsored by Atari for the new FB2. I'm glad to hear that those games were not included in the final product. 913853[/snapback] Was supposed to, but they all ended up with being ideas that no one liked. Thus we have ones that we did like, Asteroids Deluxe, Adventure 2 and Yars return for example. Are they really ran from the chip as emulated and the real core for the real A2600 games like quadrun and Pitfall? As for you ZylonBane, lately you have been lately ruining threads, trying to start agruements then ending up pissing people off. Please stop. Edited August 18, 2005 by keilbaca Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+FujiSkunk Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 Are they really ran from the chip as emulated and the real core for the real A2600 games like quadrun and Pitfall? All the games use the same hardware, which is truly 2600 compatible. That's what I've been lead to believe, that's what Albert appears to believe as well, and that's what I'll continue to believe until someone on the inside states otherwise. As for you ZylonBane, lately you have been lately ruining threads, trying to start agruements then ending up pissing people off. Please stop. 913883[/snapback] I don't always like his choice of words, but he made a valid point here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sku_u Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 I don't always like his choice of words, but he made a valid point here. As both a moderator and member, his choice of words is starting to wear very thin around here. If someone feels they have a valid point to make, there's no reason to start making jabs at the same time. All that accomplishes is getting the opposing person to either strike back (especially if they are a younger member trying to find their niche) or think the person making the jabs is a complete moron and therefore not worth replying to. I answered your question above...kind of. I'll have to dig up that old thread so you can see what I was talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uosipa llamxew Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 I think this is what you were thinking of: http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?s...emaker+conttest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sku_u Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 Yep, that's the one. Thanks. The first link in that thread's dead, but the images and contest links further down are still active. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZylonBane Posted August 18, 2005 Author Share Posted August 18, 2005 If someone feels they have a valid point to make, there's no reason to start making jabs at the same time. All that accomplishes is getting the opposing person to either strike back (especially if they are a younger member trying to find their niche) or think the person making the jabs is a complete moron and therefore not worth replying to. Sounds like an ego-defense mechanism to me, since there is absolutely no basis in fact that people who make jabs are inclined to be morons. But by all means feel free to blame me for you flipping out in this thread over a flawed understanding on your part of every aspect of what was being discussed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sku_u Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 If someone feels they have a valid point to make, there's no reason to start making jabs at the same time. All that accomplishes is getting the opposing person to either strike back (especially if they are a younger member trying to find their niche) or think the person making the jabs is a complete moron and therefore not worth replying to. Sounds like an ego-defense mechanism to me, since there is absolutely no basis in fact that people who make jabs are inclined to be morons. But by all means feel free to blame me for you flipping out in this thread over a flawed understanding on your part of every aspect of what was being discussed. 913934[/snapback] I never claimed any of my statements to be fact. IIRC=If I recall correctly. If you bothered to read above, you'd see what I was basing my assumptions (that's another way of saying opinions if you know the difference) on. It's merely my perception of people such as yourself who do not know how to express themselves properly. Drop me a PM if you'd like some pointers on etiquette. The first lesson would be Introduction to Basic Social Skills and the second Reading Comprehension Level 3. Maybe I'll throw in a basic logic lesson as well since yours is completely upside down if that's your perception of what I said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Helmet Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 This thread is sadly headed towards a lockdown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+FujiSkunk Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 Yep, that's the one. Thanks. The first link in that thread's dead, but the images and contest links further down are still active. 913931[/snapback] Ah, I can see how that would make one think it isn't just 2600-compatible hardware under the hood. Still, given everything Curt Vendell has mentioned in the forums, and given the experience other people have had with the Flashback2 so far, I'm still convinced that what we have is 100% pure 2600 goodness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZylonBane Posted August 18, 2005 Author Share Posted August 18, 2005 This thread is sadly headed towards a lockdown. It's served its purpose. Be interesting to see how the FB2 games eventually show up in the DB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flojomojo Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 This thread is sadly headed towards a lockdown. 914009[/snapback] Yeah, I agree. To sum up: Video games are still for children. This thread is the proof. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.