Re: [stella] ROM image classifications

Subject: Re: [stella] ROM image classifications
From: Glenn Saunders <cybpunks2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:50:53 -0800
At 06:42 PM 12/12/2002 -0500, you wrote:
In which category would you put, say, Coke Wins?  It's a legitimate game from
the 2600's prime that is a hack of Space Invaders but has somewhat different
gameplay.  You could argue it belongs in any of the above 3 categories - the
first because it was legally licensed and appeared at the right time, the
second because it's a hack after all, and the third because it was never
commercially released.

People don't realize that Coke Wins is more than just a hack. Note that the game has a timer at the top. It's not 100% original, but the gameplay changed, not just the graphics. Many Space Invaders hacks are actually hacks of Cokie Wins.

What about all the South American and Asian releases of various US-originated
games?  Often they have minor hacks in them and/or are PAL conversions.  Yet
they were released in the 80's legitimately in cartridge form.  Category one
or two?

There should be more than just two categories.

If a game is a derivative work, even from the classic era, then there should be some reference to the original. The web is very good at this and Atari Age's database is an excellent (but still not 100% complete) way to do it. It would be nice to have this on the client side too. XML would be an ideal way to store this because it is naturally heirarchical.

These are really rhetorical questions meant to illuminate some of the flaws in
adding another layer of classifications. Maybe it should be a 'best
practice' (whatever that term actually means) for sites offering 2600 games
to simply run 'em through Good2600 so they can categorize them easily and

But at the very least some single authoritative body should oversee the Good2600 descriptors.

Archives (includes files) at
Unsub & more at

Current Thread