Re: [stella] Emulator detection

Subject: Re: [stella] Emulator detection
From: Adam Thornton <adam@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 14:00:25 -0400
On Jul 5, 2005, at 12:10 PM, Glenn Saunders wrote:

> --- Adam Thornton <adam@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Seriously, who the hell expects to make real money
>> from 2600
>> programming?
> Infogrames.  Embedding the new games directly into the
> 2600 hardware itself (and no, not just as an
> easy-to-identify surface-mount EPROM) may be the only
> way to prevent piracy.

Well, OK, but if we're talking about mass-produced ASIC things, like  
I think you're talking about--then bets are off anyway, since you  
can't plug them into the real hardware, and the reference hardware  
isn't *really* a 2600.

In fact, why would Infogrames do it this way, rather than (as with  
the existing 2600-on-a-chip systems) a crappy NES-on-a-chip and a not- 
really-perfect-but-good-enough-for-the-unwashed-masses port of the  
game they cared about?

I mean, let's face it: anyone not ALREADY into the retrocomputing  
scene is not going to be interested in modern 2600 games, no matter  
how spectacular-for-the-system they might be.  If you're Some Dude At  
Best Buy looking at a 2600 standalone system, you probably want to  
relive your childhood with Space Invaders or Pitfall! or Breakout,  
but if faced with the choice between the (admittedly terrific)  
Skeleton+, or something shiny for your GBA, you're going to buy the  
game that has two decades more of hardware platform development under  

It's only in really extraordinary cases that the makers of the ASIC  
are going to care enough to do it right.  I don't know if you've seen  
interviews with Jeri Ellsworth on the C-64 joystick--which is  
actually eminently hackable and which can be opened up and turned  
into a full-on C-64--but she had to fight the manufacturers (and  
often lie to them) to get the hackability included in the final product.

Archives (includes files) at
Unsub & more at

Current Thread