What system should we add next?

**Kong** · 03-26-2009, 08:07 PM

ArcadeOX can support a wide range of systems. Where should we start?

**CatalystiCam** · 03-26-2009, 08:48 PM

I think we should just concentrate on what we have, There is already issues, That should be worked out, Don't you think.

**Dudebro** · 03-26-2009, 09:43 PM

I agree. Give it some time and then add some more.

Btw, anyway to add old DOS games like Qbasic gorilla?

**Kong** · 03-26-2009, 09:57 PM

Yes but they will be last. I looked into this a lot and there are some ways to do it in both ArcadeOX and Java. But they require much more effort to add and there are very few cool games that run on dos and are under 10mb and are not available on some other platform that we support.

**Dudebro** · 03-26-2009, 11:01 PM

Seems wierd that it takes more effort for such an older system. Is it that incompatible? Either way it's not a big deal but I figure it's pretty damn retro and some people would love it.

**oasis** · 03-26-2009, 11:02 PM

I chose atari 2600 to make tenser happy and coin op games if they can be score enabled

because obviously fixing what is a problem comes first before adding anything new

**ZedIsDead** · 03-26-2009, 11:05 PM

I agree, the first priority is to concentrate on what we have. Once we're happy with that, add some Atari 2600 games.

**Slime Slayer** · 03-26-2009, 11:20 PM

2600 gets my vote too

**Dudebro** · 03-26-2009, 11:22 PM

Yeah if it's not a lot of effort I say slap the atari 2600 up there. The more the better. As long as it doesn't pull you away from anything important for too long.

**Kugyince** · 03-26-2009, 11:30 PM

Got to have my E.T. and Adventure for the 2600. That should be next.

But I also think we should have all of our current games at least 90% modded before we add another system as a rule. It would just make the site look less appealing if it had tons of games but only a few were taken care of.

**Kong** · 03-26-2009, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dudebro

Seems weird that it takes more effort for such an older system. Is it that incompatible? Either way it's not a big deal but I figure it's pretty damn retro and some people would love it.

Using what you learn from NES translates to SNES more than to DOS. DOS has less similarities with the other systems. And each DOS game has more differences with other DOS games than each NES game does with other NES games.

And the DOS games are often fairly big. Any really good DOS game is too big to put online. Because of the size we would only be able to have DOS games that look like ColecoVison games.

And it takes some knowlege on the uesers part because you do not just turn it on and go like an NES. You have to set it up and configure it. Many more variables. My original plan was to add DOS games in this update with SNES games but now I am thinking it might not ever happen. They're on the bottom of a very long todo list.

**count100** · 03-27-2009, 01:37 AM

I chose 2600.

Need to play E.T. again.

**Dudebro** · 03-27-2009, 01:52 AM

Yeah don't bother with DOS stuff if it's like that. Not worth it.

**jim5cents** · 03-27-2009, 11:14 AM

personally, i would like to see coin-op. is there a technological limit to what arcadeox can do with the coin-op, for example, can it process a game like ultimate mortal kombat three, or are we limited to 80's vintage.

i'm not knocking the 2600, my favorite game for it was pitfall, but i definately think i can live my entire life and be perfectly ok with never playing e.t. again

**Kong** · 03-27-2009, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jim5cents

personally, i would like to see coin-op. is there a technological limit to what arcadeox can do with the coin-op, for example, can it process a game like ultimate mortal kombat three, or are we limited to 80's vintage.

Vintage

**samejamesbond** · 03-27-2009, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tenser

Got to have my E.T. and Adventure for the 2600. That should be next.

But I also think we should have all of our current games at least 90% modded before we add another system as a rule. It would just make the site look less appealing if it had tons of games but only a few were taken care of.

ET? :rolleyes: I have nothing to say...

**xfighter1138** · 03-27-2009, 04:23 PM

It'd be cool to play some old ATARI!

**Winnebagel** · 03-27-2009, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tenser

Got to have my E.T. and Adventure for the 2600. That should be next.

Wait, isn't there an actual land fill somewhere with like 2 million E.T. cartridges? Tenser, you could probably get a whole bevy of free games there if you went on a scavenger hunt.

**Kugyince** · 03-27-2009, 11:09 PM

Do we really need to start this again? I'm tired of defending a game because of an internet myth.

**Winnebagel** · 03-27-2009, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tenser

Do we really need to start this again? I'm tired of defending a game because of an internet myth.

I saw a recent special on G4TV and they actually went to the landfill where they are all buried. It's cool if you like the game, though. It never did much for me because I never found a way to play successfully. It always seemed like you just had to fall into pits randomly until you died.

**Dudebro** · 03-28-2009, 05:13 AM

I feel bad Tenser, seems like the ET thing will never die. Maybe add a link in your sig to one of your posts about it. Might save you some stress.

**Ashums** · 03-28-2009, 02:55 PM

My first choice would be more coin-op games, my second choice would be atari 2600 or 5200.

**PIMPMAN** · 04-01-2009, 05:12 PM

nintendo 64

**jim5cents** · 04-01-2009, 05:30 PM

as sweet as that would be, the technology doesn't exist yet to play n64 games over the internet.

**Slime Slayer** · 04-01-2009, 05:35 PM

im thinking 2600, like tenser mentioned earlier, more score games