games and games development

[carmel_andrews]

considering the surge in interest in games development in the classic/retro gaming and computing markets, or the homebrew scene as it's often reffered to as, it begs the burning question, about the games and games development market now (esp. in the 2600 sector) compared to the same market back in the day (1977-1992)

 

would you say we have better games now or a better games development market now, or would you say the games and the games development market was better back in the day

 

 

I would say leaving out enhancements like harmony/chimera etc, the games development market now and therefore the games being developed are slightly better now then back in the day (even though wee are still a little way behind in terms of overall commercial or non commercial games released

Edited January 21, 2010 by carmel_andrews

[yuppicide]

Games today are better than games back then because programmers are always learning new tricks.

[jaybird3rd]

No, emulators and other cross-development tools aren't any improvement at all. Everything was much better when 2600 programmers had to use a time share service via teletype to do their editing and assemblies.

[tetrode kink]

No, emulators and other cross-development tools aren't any improvement at all. Everything was much better when 2600 programmers had to use a time share service via teletype to do their editing and assemblies.

 

This brings up something I've wondered about for a long time: Exactly what was the development environment Atari provided VCS programmers to program games? I assume it was on some minicomputer system, since they were in existence at the time, and surely running assemblers on Big Iron would have been like driving a tractor-trailer to the store for a little grocery shopping. Also, how did the programmers test their games during development, i.e. trying out different code variations to see which ones worked best for a game, etc.

 

Also, when some Atari programmers defected and started Activision, what did they develop on? Did they sneak copied assembler software disks out the door or did they write their own? I wouldn't be surprised if it were the latter, since they were obviously some talented programmers, but I also wouldn't be surprised if it were the former.

 

-tet

 

[edit]They probably burned EPROMS to test their WIPs... duh. [/edit]

Edited January 23, 2010 by tetrode kink

[zylon]

The early games usually had only a couple people working on them versus the hundreds per game now. Another thing to consider is that Atari(after they got huge) and some others used a technique called "over-the-wall" engineering for game and system development. one guy designs a sprite and throws it over the wall, the next guy writes some sound effects and throws it over the wall, another guy has a concept or game idea and writes it up and throws it over the wall. On the other side of this wall is some programmer who has a week to fit all these things together and make something functional. Same for systems.(sorry 5200 ) One guy develops a new type of control, another guy designs a switchbox, another guy says use this board, and the last guy tries to make it work.

[Nukey Shay]

This brings up something I've wondered about for a long time: Exactly what was the development environment Atari provided VCS programmers to program games? I assume it was on some minicomputer system, since they were in existence at the time, and surely running assemblers on Big Iron would have been like driving a tractor-trailer to the store for a little grocery shopping. Also, how did the programmers test their games during development, i.e. trying out different code variations to see which ones worked best for a game, etc.

 

Also, when some Atari programmers defected and started Activision, what did they develop on? Did they sneak copied assembler software disks out the door or did they write their own? I wouldn't be surprised if it were the latter, since they were obviously some talented programmers, but I also wouldn't be surprised if it were the former.

 

Well, Atari was using a VAX mini someplace...as evidenced by their interoffice memos. Maybe Curt knows exactly what machines were afforded to the various divisions?

 

 

Bob Whitehead (re: Activision)...

Dave Crane, with some help from some simple reverse engineering and a little input from Al Miller, designed the hardware, and I wrote the debugger software. Simply, it was a ROM simulator with a RS-232 terminal interface which plugged into an Atari cartridge slot. You would download an assembled (object code) program and then run it in a simple debugging environment. The system needed a cross-compiling and source editing environment provided by a mini-computer to assemble the program. A “dumb terminal” was used as the interface to the development system and the mini-computer.

 

 

So Atari's equipment used to program 2600 games may have been similar. It's certianly the case in the home computer division, so that same mini could have had workstations used for VCS development as well.

 

 

Landon Dyer writes this about development at Atari's computer division...

We used a Data General minicomputer, an MV/8000, for cross-development. This was the machine that Tracy Kidder’s book Soul of a New Machine was all about. While it wasn’t a VAX running Unix (which I would have preferred) it was still pretty easy to use and had some decent tools (no Emacs, though). We used a version of the Atari Macro Assembler that had been ported to the MV/8000, and that was worlds better than the miserably slow Assembler/Editor cartridge I’d done Myriapede on, but everything had to be downloaded to our development systems at 9600 baud, so turnaround time became a big issue toward the end of a project, especially since we had to share the MV/8000 with fourty or fifty other people during the day, just like the overloaded mainframe back in college. I’d often stay late, and after about six PM the systems were pretty fast again (five minutes, instead of nearly an hour).

 

 

Smaller companies took advantage of the 6507 processor's nearly-identical operation to the 6502's, and just used home computers to develop on...

 

 

 

 

Bill Heineman (re: Avalon Hill)...

I used an Apple ][ with a ROM emulator for doing games.

 

 

 

Dennis Caswell (re: Arcadia)...

All of the Supercharger games were written on Apple II computers. We tested them by either downloading them directly into the Supercharger, another advantage of the device; or by using a piece of rather crude, but still useful, debugging hardware that Craig Nelson and Bob Brown (former Atari employees) had managed to acquire before my arrival.

[Retro Rogue]

This brings up something I've wondered about for a long time: Exactly what was the development environment Atari provided VCS programmers to program games?

 

Depends which generation. Original development was done on a DEC LSI-11 system running a DEC

macro assembler with macros for every 6502 instruction. The resulting object code was then burned and loaded in to the target system. At first it was was through a teletype, and then a terminal setup.

[tetrode kink]

Thanks Nukey & WGF.

 

That $#17 is endlessly fascinating to me.

 

I swear, if I ever get to see "Stella at 20" it'll be all I can do not to spooge all over it.

 

-tet

[rpgfaker]

Smaller companies took advantage of the 6507 processor's nearly-identical operation to the 6502's, and just used home computers to develop on...

 

Bill Heineman (re: Avalon Hill)...

I used an Apple ][ with a ROM emulator for doing games.

 

I never knew that was possible..that's crazy.

[Wickeycolumbus]

This brings up something I've wondered about for a long time: Exactly what was the development environment Atari provided VCS programmers to program games? I assume it was on some minicomputer system, since they were in existence at the time, and surely running assemblers on Big Iron would have been like driving a tractor-trailer to the store for a little grocery shopping. Also, how did the programmers test their games during development, i.e. trying out different code variations to see which ones worked best for a game, etc.

 

Also, when some Atari programmers defected and started Activision, what did they develop on? Did they sneak copied assembler software disks out the door or did they write their own? I wouldn't be surprised if it were the latter, since they were obviously some talented programmers, but I also wouldn't be surprised if it were the former.

 

A former Atari programmer told me:

 

There were emulators on every programmer's desk. They were hooked up to an old PDP-8 computer in another room where your files were stored, but you could display how the game was playing via the emulator and a TV at any time. Because the emulator wasn't exactly perfect (it was more tolerant of clock cycle errors, and some glitches that wouldn't work on an actual game console) when a project was nearing completion, you would go to another room and tell Pam (the girl who was in charge there) to burn an EPROM cart, then test it out on an actual Atari 2600. About 75% of the time there were some glitches that had to be figured out and reprogrammed. I remember having one that was really bizarre, causing a firestorm of swirling colors and flashes on the 2600, but it played just fine on the emulator. The test EPROM carts were never supposed to leave the building, which is one reason they are so rare today.

[tetrode kink]

Uuuuuuaaaauuuughhhh... :drools:

 

Atari VCS History Pron! Thank you

 

-tet

[Nukey Shay]

I never knew that was possible..that's crazy.

 

I'm sure that "rom emulator" is being used there in the most technical sense. Nothing like Z26 or Stella...which are system emulators. By the 6507's design, most of a program's code would be directly compatable with an 8-bit computer like the Apple II's 6502 already. System-specific portions (like a display kernel) would have required testing on an actual console - either by uploading the assembled binary to a hardware device like the Supercharger, or burning it to eprom.

[shadow460]

As for the games themselves, I think that any 2600 game is still subject to the hot or flop standards today. I think it's still very possible to program a dud even though there are far better development tools today. I don't own very many 2600 homebrews, so I can't say for myself. A browse through the Video Game Critic's reviews will tell you that it's definitely possible for a "new" game to stink just as it was with many of the "old" ones.

[OldAtarian]

This brings up something I've wondered about for a long time: Exactly what was the development environment Atari provided VCS programmers to program games? I assume it was on some minicomputer system, since they were in existence at the time, and surely running assemblers on Big Iron would have been like driving a tractor-trailer to the store for a little grocery shopping. Also, how did the programmers test their games during development, i.e. trying out different code variations to see which ones worked best for a game, etc.

 

Also, when some Atari programmers defected and started Activision, what did they develop on? Did they sneak copied assembler software disks out the door or did they write their own? I wouldn't be surprised if it were the latter, since they were obviously some talented programmers, but I also wouldn't be surprised if it were the former.

 

Well, Atari was using a VAX mini someplace...as evidenced by their interoffice memos. Maybe Curt knows exactly what machines were afforded to the various divisions?

 

 

Bob Whitehead (re: Activision)...

Dave Crane, with some help from some simple reverse engineering and a little input from Al Miller, designed the hardware, and I wrote the debugger software. Simply, it was a ROM simulator with a RS-232 terminal interface which plugged into an Atari cartridge slot. You would download an assembled (object code) program and then run it in a simple debugging environment. The system needed a cross-compiling and source editing environment provided by a mini-computer to assemble the program. A “dumb terminal” was used as the interface to the development system and the mini-computer.

 

 

So Atari's equipment used to program 2600 games may have been similar. It's certianly the case in the home computer division, so that same mini could have had workstations used for VCS development as well.

 

 

Landon Dyer writes this about development at Atari's computer division...

We used a Data General minicomputer, an MV/8000, for cross-development. This was the machine that Tracy Kidder’s book Soul of a New Machine was all about. While it wasn’t a VAX running Unix (which I would have preferred) it was still pretty easy to use and had some decent tools (no Emacs, though). We used a version of the Atari Macro Assembler that had been ported to the MV/8000, and that was worlds better than the miserably slow Assembler/Editor cartridge I’d done Myriapede on, but everything had to be downloaded to our development systems at 9600 baud, so turnaround time became a big issue toward the end of a project, especially since we had to share the MV/8000 with fourty or fifty other people during the day, just like the overloaded mainframe back in college. I’d often stay late, and after about six PM the systems were pretty fast again (five minutes, instead of nearly an hour).

 

 

Smaller companies took advantage of the 6507 processor's nearly-identical operation to the 6502's, and just used home computers to develop on...

 

 

 

 

Bill Heineman (re: Avalon Hill)...

I used an Apple ][ with a ROM emulator for doing games.

 

 

 

Dennis Caswell (re: Arcadia)...

All of the Supercharger games were written on Apple II computers. We tested them by either downloading them directly into the Supercharger, another advantage of the device; or by using a piece of rather crude, but still useful, debugging hardware that Craig Nelson and Bob Brown (former Atari employees) had managed to acquire before my arrival.

Instead of mainframes and minis, wouldn't it just have been a lot cheaper for Atari to make a machine that would have essentially been a 2600 but with a keyboard and enough RAM and ROM to run an assembler/debugger?

[Nukey Shay]

A dev computer to hold all of the source, assemble, and execute (accurately emulate) it on-the-fly? Sorry, that's what 65xx programmers could only dream of.

[BydoEmpire]

I like modern dev tools and debuggers, but I hate the problems that come with the size of modern games and teams and the reality of the modern games business. Development was a lot more fun in the 80s and 90s because it was smaller and personal, and your only focus was making cool stuff. Now you're completing X tasks in Y hours, making sure that you do what someone five levels of management above you wants you to do. Not to mention communication issues with different designers who disagree, who are then overruled by project management, who are asked to change course two weeks before beta because of some marketing decision. In short, programming was a lot more fun 15-20 years ago, but modern tools are wonderful and it'd be hard to go back. My 2c.

 

[Edit]After rereading this thread, are you talking about modern development of classic games or of modern games (ps3,360,etc)?

Edited December 9, 2010 by BydoEmpire

[maiki]

Yep, I voted BETTER NOW and I am happy to see most people have the right opinion. Aztec Challenge, Juno First, Lady Bug, Thrust, Conquest Of Mars...