Two-Player Chess & Checkers for ColecoVision

[Pixelboy]

I was in the mood to work with MS-Paint today, so here's another set of ColecoVision mockups for your approval. I've never been a big fan of chess or checkers (in fact, I suck at both games big time), but they would still make nice games for the CV, IMO.

 

I call this game Two-Player Chess and Checkers because there is no single-player mode. I figure no one in his right mind would want to tackle computer AI for chess with just 1K of RAM, although I know it's possible. On the other hand, the game WOULD detect and prevent illegal moves during play.

 

The first attached screenshot presents the game from WHITE's point of view. When it's BLACK's turn, the whole chess board rotates 90 degrees, as pictured in the second screenshot. The third screenshot demonstrates the same checkered board being used for a game of two-player checkers.

 

Moving the chess/checker pieces around the board could be done in one of two ways: The first method is simply to use the joystick to move a cursor around the board. When the cursor is over an empty space, it appears as an "X" (as shown in the first screenshot). When the cursor is over one of the player's own pieces, it assumes the shape of the piece to highlight it (as shown in the second screenshot). When it's over one of the opponent's pieces, the cursor turns into a red "forbidden" sign.

 

The alternate way to select game pieces is to use the CV keypad: The game would include a pair of overlays that you can insert into the standard CV controllers, and a player can make the cursor jump to a specific piece by pressing the appropriate key on the keypad. If there is more than one of the desired piece on the board, the player can press the same keypad button repeatedly until the correct piece is selected. (Note that this only works in chess, not checkers. In checkers, only the joystick can be used to move the cursor around).

 

Once a piece is selected (with the left trigger button), it can be moved around the board with the joystick. The computer will undo a move if it declares it as illegal for one reason or another.

 

When a chess piece is "eaten", it is removed from the board and transfered to the upper left corner (if a black piece is eaten) or upper right corner (if a white piece is eaten) of the screen.

 

For chess, the game program would NOT try to detect a "check-mate" situation, so it would be up to the players to determine the winner. For checkers, the game would be over when all of a player's pieces have been eaten. For stalemate situations in either games, the players can just reset the game or quit playing.

 

After studying the graphic design of this game, I came to the conclusion that it can't be done in anything else than Graphic Mode #3 (or bitmap mode, if you prefer). This is because the overlaping chess pieces present too many possible rendering combinations to fit within just 256 tiles, although I suppose it could possibly be done with Graphic Mode #1 if the board didn't rotate to fit each player's view.

 

But if I could program this thing - which I can't - I would prefer to do it in bitmap mode: A display engine could be devised to render the current state of the chess board dynamically, which would be pretty neat, IMHO.

[Bucket]

I was thinking "yeah, it'd be convenient to have different viewpoints for white & black", because the King and Queen are mirrored on each side. But I can see you didn't draw that.

 

...

 

You say there will be no feature to announce check in the game, yet you also say the computer will prevent illegal moves. Well, making a move that puts your own King in check is illegal. So is any move that doesn't remove check when he's in check already. Not to mention one of the rules of Castling requires that the King not MOVE THROUGH check.

 

There's already more involved in this game than you anticipated.

Edited May 19, 2006 by Bucket

[+SpiceWare]

I call this game Two-Player Chess and Checkers because there is no single-player mode. I figure no one in his right mind would want to tackle computer AI for chess with just 1K of RAM, although I know it's possible.

Considering it was done with 128 bytes of RAM, I'd say it should be a breeze to do it with 1K.

[Pixelboy]

I was thinking "yeah, it'd be convenient to have different viewpoints for white & black", because the King and Queen are mirrored on each side. But I can see you didn't draw that.

Nah, I didn't see the point, especially for the queen since she's symetrical from any viewpoint. I suppose I could draw the cross over the king's head at a slight angle...

 

You say there will be no feature to announce check in the game, yet you also say the computer will prevent illegal moves. Well, making a move that puts your own King in check is illegal. So is any move that doesn't remove check when he's in check already. Not to mention one of the rules of Castling requires that the King not MOVE THROUGH check. There's already more involved in this game than you anticipated.

I believe you misread, dear sir. I was refering to check-mate, not check. Detecting a "check" situation is relatively easy, but determining a check-mate is more complex. And yes, the program would consider a check-resultant move as illegal.

[Bucket]

No, I'm talking about your board setup. Kings and Queens should be across from each other. More specifically, the Queen is always on her color, and your board colors are reversed. So invert the board, switch black's King and Queen, and you're set. With the CORRECT board setup, you'd only have to mirror the whole image and invert every piece. That is, until someone made a move... good thinking, anyway. The isometric viewpoint adds a lot.

 

As for Checkmate as opposed to Check... I can't imagine it being that big of a leap from figuring out if the move at hand is illegal, to figuring out if any possible moves at a given point are legal.

Edited May 19, 2006 by Bucket

[Zach]

Once you understand how AI for board games works in general, checkers is pretty easy. Even chess is not that difficult, though it would be time-consuming to code all the rules. I've even thought about doing chess myself.

 

(If you're wealthy, Pixelboy, hire me to do the coding. I take Canadian dollars )

Edited May 19, 2006 by Zach

[Pixelboy]

No, I'm talking about your board setup. Kings and Queens should be across from each other. More specifically, the Queen is always on her color, and your board colors are reversed. So invert the board, switch black's King and Queen, and you're set. With the CORRECT board setup, you'd only have to mirror the whole image and invert every piece. That is, until someone made a move...

Oh, I see! Did I mention I suck at chess?

 

 

good thinking, anyway. The isometric viewpoint adds a lot.

Thanks. It's nowhere near a novel idea, but I wanted to demonstrate what it would look like on the ColecoVision. One problem with the isometric view point is that if two or three pieces get aligned vertically (i.e. on diagonal squares of the same color), then the pieces become hard to make out, given the monochrome nature of the display. This problem is aliviated by moving the cursor over each piece to highlight it. The highlighting is done with sprites, which means the highlighted piece is drawn out and not overshadowed by another piece under it.

 

 

As for Checkmate as opposed to Check... I can't imagine it being that big of a leap from figuring out if the move at hand is illegal, to figuring out if any possible moves at a given point are legal.

Y'know, you may be right about that...

 

One thing I forgot to mention before is that key "7" on the keypad can be used to make the "castling" move (where the king and rook get switched around). Just place the cursor on the rook piece involved with the switch, press "7", and presto! This only works when all legal conditions for this move are met, of course.

[Pixelboy]

(If you're wealthy, Pixelboy, hire me to do the coding. I take Canadian dollars )

Just for the sake of argument, do you have any programming experience with the ColecoVision (specifically with bitmap mode), and how much would you charge for coding this game for me?

[Bucket]

Give him TWO FIDDY.

[Zach]

(If you're wealthy, Pixelboy, hire me to do the coding. I take Canadian dollars )

Just for the sake of argument, do you have any programming experience with the ColecoVision (specifically with bitmap mode), and how much would you charge for coding this game for me?

I'm experienced enough to figure out the ColecoVision. I'd say roughly a few thousand US dollars. If you can make a serious offer, we can work out a more exact amount.

[Pixelboy]

I'm experienced enough to figure out the ColecoVision. I'd say roughly a few thousand US dollars. If you can make a serious offer, we can work out a more exact amount.

Well, I wouldn't "invest" that kind of money on a chess game, that's for sure. I don't even really like chess all that much to begin with.

 

I understand that your price is actually quite reasonable, considering the amount of work involved, but to blow that kind of money for getting a single game coded by a programmer without prior CV homebrew experience, it would have to be really worth it. So I'd be more enclined to pay for getting a game like Sokoban realized. Anything more complex than that (like an arcade port for example) would probably cost a lot more to program, and I can't afford that.

 

Besides, after the game is finished, what would I do with the ROM? Spend even more money on producing a limited series of cartridges, which would probably sell for a higher price than normal because I'd have to pass along not only the cart/manual/box manufacturing costs, but the coding costs as well? I can afford that even less.

 

I'm not looking to make any kind of profit here, so if I knew of a way where I could get a game programmed, and then manufactured in cartridge format at a reasonable selling price where I would just barely get my money back, I'd go for it. Otherwise, I'd be just throwing money out the window.

[Bruce Tomlin]

I'm experienced enough to figure out the ColecoVision. I'd say roughly a few thousand US dollars. If you can make a serious offer, we can work out a more exact amount.

Well, I wouldn't "invest" that kind of money on a chess game, that's for sure. I don't even really like chess all that much to begin with.

Then you should refer to Figure 1. People who do know how to program generally have their own ideas of what to do with what little free time they have. First priority goes to a job which can pay for food and shelter (most classic gaming fans are not old enough to be retired), then they can pursue hobbies like programming for old video game consoles.

[Pixelboy]

Then you should refer to Figure 1. People who do know how to program generally have their own ideas of what to do with what little free time they have. First priority goes to a job which can pay for food and shelter (most classic gaming fans are not old enough to be retired), then they can pursue hobbies like programming for old video game consoles.

So in other words, I need to learn how to program my "proposed" games myself, and I shouldn't bother other people until I do. Okay, I'll stop my idea-peddling ways. It's time I put my efforts where it really counts...

[Bucket]

Nothing personal, but that's how things are. A designer's time is no less valuable. Design is my job, and I realize there's a rift between them and programmers as to who is more irreplaceable (those of you may not relate; YMMV). But that's neither here nor there-- it only serves to illustrate people's (lack of) willingness to set out materializing someone else's vision on their own time.

 

So... I'm learning assembly as we speak. It's tough for my visually-tuned brain, but I'm sure one day it'll all make sense. And I've learned not to share ideas, save open discussion, until I can do something with them.

 

Plus, there's the fact that the FBI is watching and will sell your ideas to Microsoft.

[Pixelboy]

And I've learned not to share ideas, save open discussion, until I can do something with them.

Good thing I haven't shared my REAL ideas with the rest of you. I was just testing the waters with my Arkanoid and Chess threads, following the advice I received in the Idea Peddler's thread. I now see it was bad advice.

[Zach]

Good thing I haven't shared my REAL ideas with the rest of you. I was just testing the waters with my Arkanoid and Chess threads, following the advice I received in the Idea Peddler's thread. I now see it was bad advice.

It is still worthwhile to look at what could be: feasible designs for homebrews, even if they are never programmed. My blog is full of such ideas.

[+batari]

Nothing personal, but that's how things are. A designer's time is no less valuable. Design is my job, and I realize there's a rift between them and programmers as to who is more irreplaceable (those of you may not relate; YMMV). But that's neither here nor there-- it only serves to illustrate people's (lack of) willingness to set out materializing someone else's vision on their own time.

 

So... I'm learning assembly as we speak. It's tough for my visually-tuned brain, but I'm sure one day it'll all make sense. And I've learned not to share ideas, save open discussion, until I can do something with them.

 

Plus, there's the fact that the FBI is watching and will sell your ideas to Microsoft.

I agree that a designer's time is no less valuable, but only if you consider it on an hourly basis. The amount of time required to design a game for a classic console is a tiny fraction of the time it takes to actually program it.

Good thing I haven't shared my REAL ideas with the rest of you. I was just testing the waters with my Arkanoid and Chess threads, following the advice I received in the Idea Peddler's thread. I now see it was bad advice.

If you're going to show us something, show the real McCoy. When you tested the waters, it shouldn't be a big surprise that your decoys didn't float.

[Bruce Tomlin]

I agree that a designer's time is no less valuable, but only if you consider it on an hourly basis. The amount of time required to design a game for a classic console is a tiny fraction of the time it takes to actually program it.

And just because someone knows how to program, that doesn't automatically mean they don't know how to design a game or create the artwork.

 

After all, most 2600 games were created by one person. No art staff, no music staff, just one person.

[Pixelboy]

If you're going to show us something, show the real McCoy. When you tested the waters, it shouldn't be a big surprise that your decoys didn't float.

And with that single comment, you just pretty much negated the opening post in the Ideas Peddler's thread altogether. I don't say that as criticism towards you, batari, it's just that there's something about the Ideas Peddler's thread that just doesn't make sense.

 

On one hand, there are members who say that idea peddlers have a small place in the Homebrew Discussion forums (such as Zach in his post above, and also the description of this sub-forum clearly welcomes idea peddlers), but then there are other people who react somewhat mildly negatively to any non-programmer who comes along with ideas that they can't program themselves.

 

I understand that if a noob comes along and just begs for a homebrew programmer to make his dream game, then this noob needs to be told what's what. My point is that even if a guy puts some effort into his game idea (mostly with graphic mock-ups, since he can't program), then in the end this guy is mostly just wasting his time just as much as the begging noob, in terms of the kind of response he can expect from knowledgeable members.

 

I'm not saying I'm expecting that homebrew programmers should jump at the chance to program my game ideas for free just because I include supporting images. In fact, you'll notice that I didn't actually ask for my ideas to be realized, in either the Arkanoid thread or this thread. I just posted them as demonstration (and I only asked Zach about how much he charged for coding the chess game because I wanted to get an idea of the cost). That didn't stop a link to the Idea Peddler's thread from popping up along the way.

 

This brings me back to my original point I made in my first post in the Idea Peddler's thread: There needs to be a clear policy about this issue, and the Idea Peddler's thread is NOT doing the job, IMHO, because it conveys points which are subject to interpretation. Such a policy should not only dictate how idea peddlers should present their ideas (with mock-ups, and with absolutely no expectation that a homebrew programmer will turn them into real games) but also how other members (most notably knowledgeable programmers) should react to such threads. The Idea Peddler's thread is only doing half the job, and because of this, it becomes the default response from other members whenever the discussion turns to actual coding and realization. Being shown the Idea Peddler's thread is positively informative the first time around, but it gets a little annoying when you've already read it and are trying to abide by it.

[vdub_bobby]

I don't see what all the fuss is about. Pixelboy has started some nice threads with some very nice mockups of CV homebrews. As far as I can tell, they are actually feasible on the hardware they are targetted for, though I think he underestimates the potential quality of a chess program on a classic console. Like SpiceWare said, chess has been coded for the 2600; surely a complete version (with AI and all the basics) could be coded for the CV.

 

Of course, your comment that you don't even really like chess seems a bit odd if you are trying to sell the concept.

 

And...the Idea Peddlers post, and thread, weren't intended as, and aren't, any kind of official policy. It is just a guide for nonprogrammers who want their ideas to be taken seriously. And it was written by me; I certainly don't speak for every programmer who visits these boards.

[Pixelboy]

As far as I can tell, they are actually feasible on the hardware they are targetted for, though I think he underestimates the potential quality of a chess program on a classic console. Like SpiceWare said, chess has been coded for the 2600; surely a complete version (with AI and all the basics) could be coded for the CV. Of course, your comment that you don't even really like chess seems a bit odd if you are trying to sell the concept.

My original premise for this CV chess game was not "Hey, I'd like to play a chess game like this on the CV", but rather "I'd like to know - and demonstrate - what a chess game with isometric graphics would look like on the CV". While working on the graphic design, I figured out that it could only be done properly in bitmap mode. That was the main goal of the exercise. The secondary goal was to establish a valid controller input method, and I think my keypad-shortcut overlay idea works well enough.

 

And...the Idea Peddlers post, and thread, weren't intended as, and aren't, any kind of official policy. It is just a guide for nonprogrammers who want their ideas to be taken seriously. And it was written by me; I certainly don't speak for every programmer who visits these boards.

Your post/thread was definately a valiant effort, and it's good for newcomers to the Homebrew Discussion sub-forum. I guess all I'm saying is that if your Idea Peddler's text becomes some sort of de-facto response, such a response should be reserved for the newcomers, not guys like me who understand the issue and are willing to put some work into their game ideas before demonstrating them.

 

The whole issue is a big moot point anyhow, since I won't be posting any more of my ideas. Not until I can program a CV game on my own, which is months, perhaps even years away from happening.

[vdub_bobby]

The whole issue is a big moot point anyhow, since I won't be posting any more of my ideas. Not until I can program a CV game on my own, which is months, perhaps even years away from happening.

I'd encourage you to stay, just because I enjoy looking at good mockups. But the fact of the matter is that if you want a CV game programmed, for you or based on your idea, this might not be the best place to start. There are only 2 or 3 CV programmers who are active on AA that I know of - the CV programming board is pretty inactive.

[+batari]

If you're going to show us something, show the real McCoy. When you tested the waters, it shouldn't be a big surprise that your decoys didn't float.

And with that single comment, you just pretty much negated the opening post in the Ideas Peddler's thread altogether. I don't say that as criticism towards you, batari, it's just that there's something about the Ideas Peddler's thread that just doesn't make sense.

Sure, the idea peddler's thread isn't perfect and maybe a few things need to be added/changed. However, there will always be a few who reacty negatively to ideas from non-programmers no matter what is added to the thread. Maybe one thing to add to the thread about mockups and a well-thought-out design: This will certainly help along a good idea, but they won't help a bad idea.

 

I read the Arkanoid thread after my response, and that is not a bad idea, and the mockups look good. And the response was generally good there. But I can't see why anyone would play a 2-player chess game on a console when it's easier and more satisfying to just pull out the board and game pieces. Any chess videogame needs AI. In this case, mockups of the idea was like putting a tuxedo on a pig. But was it a waste of time? Not necessarily.

 

You may ask why you should do mockups at all, since if you just said "2-player chess" by itself, I would have said the same thing, so in this sense the mockups didn't help. But if you just said "Arkanoid" without the mockups, I expect that people would have responded less favorably.

[vdub_bobby]

You may ask why you should do mockups at all, since if you just said "2-player chess" by itself, I would have said the same thing, so in this sense the mockups didn't help. But if you just said "Arkanoid" without the mockups, I expect that people would have responded less favorably.

It is worth doing lots of mockups, even for games that maybe aren't real compelling, because if you can get good feedback from coders it will improve your subsequent mockups.

 

This is perhaps more important for the systems with really complicated video hardware (2600, 7800, for example), but will help for all systems.

[Bruce Tomlin]

I don't see what all the fuss is about. Pixelboy has started some nice threads with some very nice mockups of CV homebrews. As far as I can tell, they are actually feasible on the hardware they are targetted for, though I think he underestimates the potential quality of a chess program on a classic console. Like SpiceWare said, chess has been coded for the 2600; surely a complete version (with AI and all the basics) could be coded for the CV.

The point where this changed from "nice mockups" to NPIP was when he said he'd pay money to get some programming done... and then balked when someone gave him a realistic price range.

 

This isn't like getting an artist to make you a picture for fifty bucks. That picture takes anywhere from 15 minutes to a few hours. Fifty bucks is fine for something that you can do on a Saturday afternoon. Programming a video game (as opposed to doing a hack) takes weeks (hell, it took six months for people being paid to do it full time back in the day!), and during that time you need food and shelter. The only people with spare time like that are students (especially pre-college) and retirees. These days you don't get a lot of students who are interested in the Z-80, and this hobby isn't old enough for retirees. And the ones in the middle who have to work a regular job don't have enough time to do all the things they already want to do.

 

I'd love to make enough money to survive off my hobby. But that ain't happening, at least not until I live in a house that's paid for, which is probably about ten years away even with all the extra principal I've been paying. There's just no economies of scale in dead systems (where a hot selling title could sell 100-200 at $5 profit each) to make it profitable.

 

And as Batari says, why would anyone play 2-player chess on a cantankerous old video game console when they could play it on a real board with real pieces? And why would anyone play 1-player chess on a slow old Z-80 which they could beat at any reasonable speed when they can play against Gnu-Chess on a modern computer?

Edited May 24, 2006 by Bruce Tomlin