Atari 2600 Vanguard Prototype / Tester

[T-Pac | 7,544]

Can anyone verify a 2600 prototype?

I don't know much about prototypes / test cartridges, but I took a chance on this purchase because Vanguard is one of my favorite 2600 games. The seller said "I bought several of these from an ex-Atari programmer in the late 1990's. This is an "early finished" prototype of a game that was sent outside of the company for play testing. That is how it was explained to me. PCB has been kept inside the stapled bag since the early 1980's."

There was no cartridge shell - just the board. I played through the first loop and it does appear to be the final build of the game. I also dumped the ROM, but I don't know how to compare the data to the retail release.

I don't know what to make of the "Van Gaurd" misspelling on the label or the copyright dates on the PCB (1982 lines-up with the 2600 port, but 1983 would be post-release). I also would've expected an EPROM on the board, but this doesn't even look like a normal socketed chip...

So is this authentic?

-CasualCart

[darkchylde28 | 1,546]

I'm no expert, but looking at it critically, it looks more like a packaged for sale bootleg than a prototype.  It's got an epoxy blob versus a chip (that the regular retail has), no shell (Atari prototypes were typically sent out in unlabeled black carts with a piece of masking tape stuck on with the game name written on it), and stapled closed in a small baggie with a cardboard hanger at the top and the name printed (poorly) on a slap on label.  It could have come from an Atari developer, as I've heard tales of such developers laying hands on various bootlegs to help figure how they were doing it, see if there were any tips they could grab from them for real production, help Atari in preparing to sue them, etc., but I really don't think this is in any way a real prototype.  As you pointed out, the board used has a creation date that's after the retail release of the game, so unless it's some sort of sequel to Vanguard on there, I call shenanigans on that board.

[RH | 4,903]

Did they have blobs with viable chips on them, that small back in 1978-1985?  Maybe, but that seems like something that couldn't have fit on a chip that small until maybe early 90s, at the earliest.

[Code Monkey | 2,010]

Prototype chips were made to be removed from the board for modification and replaced. Glob tops were permanent factory productions, I would be too scared to pay a lot for this.

[darkchylde28 | 1,546]

On 2/12/2022 at 5:55 PM, RH said:

Did they have blobs with viable chips on them, that small back in 1978-1985?  Maybe, but that seems like something that couldn't have fit on a chip that small until maybe early 90s, at the earliest.

Yes, they absolutely did, at least toward the end of the period you're talking about.  Remember that Nintendo started introducing glob top versions of some of its cartridges as early as 1985-1986 or so in order to keep up with demand of certain games.  Many companies avoided such small chips/glob tops just due to how difficult maintenance would be on them inside of standard consume electronics.  For video games, though?  The amount of maintenance usually required on any piece within its warranty period has always been incredibly low, so no real risk to manufacturers who chose to go a cheaper route and go with a smaller, dedicated, less capable chip and then sealing it in with epoxy to keep consumers (or in Atari's case, probable lawsuit pursuers) from seeing what was there and meddling with it.  Games of that era were often a kilobyte or two in size, at best, so chips to hold that much data really didn't have to be that big at all once the technology was there.  If they could glob top SMB in ~1986, they absolutely could glob top Vanguard in ~1983.

[T-Pac | 7,544]

@darkchylde28 @RH @Code Monkey thanks for the insights! The glob top is definitely a concern - I hope that just means this board falls somewhere between prototype and retail release, but I'm resigned to the possibility that this isn't an authentic test-game after all.

I should probably make an AtariAge account to see if some of the experts over there can figure this out.

-CasualCart

[darkchylde28 | 1,546]

2 hours ago, CasualCart said:

@darkchylde28 @RH @Code Monkey thanks for the insights! The glob top is definitely a concern - I hope that just means this board falls somewhere between prototype and retail release, but I'm resigned to the possibility that this isn't an authentic test-game after all.

I should probably make an AtariAge account to see if some of the experts over there can figure this out.

-CasualCart

Well, as you pointed out, the board has a copyright date that's a year after its retail release, so there's basically no way that it's a real prototype of the retail release.  Actual prototypes and pre-release playtest copies cannot have copyright information on them that postdates the retail release.  If this isn't a bootleg, then I'd guess it's some sort of licensed third party release or a reprint/re-release not manufactured by Atari, since both their name and GIC's is on the board.  It makes for a conversation piece, but I don't think there's any way that it'll ever turn out to be what it was presented and sold as.

You said that you dumped the ROM off of it, so why not do the same with the retail release of Vanguard then do a file compare of the two output files?  That'll tell you if there are any differences, even if you might not have the programming expertise to tell what those differences are.  If there aren't any, you'll be able to tell that somebody straight up copied the original, and a year after release, to boot.

[Code Monkey | 2,010]

5 hours ago, CasualCart said:

I should probably make an AtariAge account to see if some of the experts over there can figure this out.

-CasualCart

It's been nice knowing you.