This object makes sense to me only if, even if there is a display, which is fundamentally different than tracing line with the CRT raster, at least that original process is simulated. If the lines buffer is rendered just with a line drawing algorithm where the line is uniform, I kinda fail to see the point of emulating an object like that. Sure, still kinda a nice gadget, but... And, the ESP32 inside tells me that it is hardly a physical simulation of the CRT reactive surface and the electrons beam. The point of this device was the way the lines were traced without the help of the main CPU of the device, and in a way where pixels didn't make any sense at all. They are lines at the lower of the levels. Failing to do that in the emulation is kinda betraying the device.
This object makes sense to me only if, even if there is a
display, which is fundamentally different than tracing line
with the CRT raster, at least that original process is simulated.
Yes to all of that, but also, I think a raster display of sufficiently high DPI can simulate a vector display very well, if and only if they pay attention to the right things. A vector display is visually unique for a few reasons.
- The lines themselves which are honestly the easiest part to fake if the DPI is high enough, past the point of visual distinction.
- The "bloom" or "glow" (phosphor bleed, or whatever the right term is) around the lines
- The temporal effects caused by the screen phosphor continuing to glow even after the beam no longer hits them. The most obvious example is the "streak" left behind the ultra-bright moving bullets in Asteroids which looks absolutely awesome
I have seen incredible examples of vector/CRT emulation when people get creative with RetroArch (or whatever) GPU powered shaders.The only things that emulation can't match (for me) are input latency and the magic of knowing that the process of creating the image is "real" and not "faked."
I remember people on HN arguing with me years ago that digital was better than analog/vinyl.
I lived through the 70s and 80s and nothing is the same as CRTs and actual vector graphics the way they were meant to be: shooting electrons at your head, making your eyes red, probably increasing cancer rates, and looking fucking awesome. Nothing beats them. I miss TV snow and I miss real vector graphics.
> A vector display is visually unique for a few reasons.
Agreed. I'd add to your list the unique way vector displays are brighter and have more bloom at the intersections where two line endpoints overlap due to being double traced.
I agree totally. Seeing one of the real devices with my own eyes was almost a surreal experience - I almost couldn't believe how good it looked given A) the age and B) the size. Such a neat device
Yeah they're clearly not targeting people that have played a vectrex in their youth.
The games were nothing to write home about, but the rendering was fun.
You could emulate it with a slow rendering and fade (clear frame with black 99% opacity), but it would have to be perfect. Still, you'd never get the same glow on the drawing point.
> The Vectrex Mini captures the full spirit of the original Vectrex [...] AMOLED display with a resolution of 800×600
I played many hours on a Vectrex, and I'd say that the true vector graphics was the spirit.
If this project is able to capture that spirit in 800x600 AMOLED, that will be very impressive, and I will be curious how they did it.
Edit: The Vectrex was a nice piece of creative engineering, within the constraints and opportunities of the time, on a wonderful product. I suppose (if you look at the comments here) it's difficult to make an homage to such a beloved thing, and hit the best notes in how you reveal it. This Mini looks impressive, and hopefully recaptures some of the magic.
I would pay a LOT for a true vector display, and I would pay even more than that for a vector display systems that can play faithful recastings of Tempest and Asteroids.
I can already play vector games on rasterized displays. I don't need an injection molded cabinet.
> "the console features a built-in 5-inch AMOLED display with a resolution of 800×600, delivering sharp and bright vector graphics"
So ... NOT vector graphics. Rasterized bitmap versions of vector graphics.
EDIT: Sorry, I'm not saying this isn't cool. I know rasterizing a vector to a sharp bitmapped display can still allow effects to simulate continuously drawn vector artifacts e.g. thin lines, thicker at vertices, refresh, flicker, etc.
Nothing matches the pinpoint of light dancing around that Vectrex provides. I'm not sure it's feasible to sell something based on vector graphics like Vectrex did, but it would be way cooler!
Maybe a raster display could match it, but it would need more dynamic range and much better resolution, plus processing power to perpetrate a screen-wide simulation of the glowing phosphor.
This is the opposite of what I'd want. Give me an actual vector display, and double the screen size. This is just going to provide an experience like myriad chinese handheld emulators.
Yeah, not really the same. I had a really really complete Vectrex setup, every game (even the stupid ones :-)) AND their overlays, I'm pretty sure every accessory. Which I ended up selling to a guy doing a museum?[1] Anyway it was quite the game for me. I knew eventually it would stop working and then just be a memory but still.
The screen was what really made it, and I get that having a vector scope manufactured would be expensive (it isn't true that nobody makes CRTs any more, but it is true that they don't come cheaply). Its also the reason I never really went all the way and bought one of my all time favorite arcade games which was the cockpit version of 'Star Wars' with its color vector display. (even harder to store!)
In a related effort, I looked at replicating a CRT "look" for some older test equipment that came with CRTs using a high dpi IPS display. I probably could have succeeded if I had an FPGA for doing the phosphor simulation (I developed a lot of respect for Tektronix's DPO technology and their patent portfolio on same :-). Very much a diminishing returns kind of thing.
[1] If you're that guy and reading this say "hi" :-)
I wonder if an FPGA is still necessary. 4k/8k are running way over 60 fps these days. Presumably a gpu could do a decent job emulating the phosphor.
In related news, atari 2600 emulators are keeping 4-8 cores > 50% busy these days. How else do you get accurate ntsc “red blur”, and capacitor effects from blinking pixels?
I suppose it would depend on how you wanted to simulate it. In my case I was targeting taking the signal from an unmodified test instrument that thought it was talking to a CRT and using that to figure out what display it wanted. That would be equivalent to taking the X/Y/Intensity lines from the mainboard of a Vectrex and just doing what the vector scope would have done. I drilled down enough to find the non-linear, temperature dependent, curve of phosphor decay times on the CRT used in some HP gear. It was pretty wild. If you buy third party kits they don't even bother simulating phosphor. Instead they just take the signals, figure out the information content of the display, and put that on an LCD. (Monochrome generally)
We still get cathode ray oscilloscopes. Apparently the og has a grid screen. Wonder what it costs to get a CRT maker to get custom dimensions, phosphor colors, curvature etc?
AliExpress has these 4-inch "flat CRTs" that look like they scan the vertical axis onto a sort of parabolic screen. I've thought about playing with one, but decided I don't want to risk shocking myself for a tiny distorted image. Still have no idea for which application they're intended.
I suppose you could even point that at a screen with phosphors on it for a more CRT-like effect. (Maybe you'd need a different kind of phosphor since you'd be exciting it with visible light rather than with an electron beam, though.)
Do we? I was under the impression that CRTs were not being manufactured anywhere anymore. I could definitely be wrong, but I couldn't find anything with a quick search.
But they're only building them for specialty niche military and industrial applications (e.g., replacement parts for old fighter jet HUDs). You could ask them about building one for your SNES setup or old arcade machine, but it'll cost you call-for-pricing dollars (tens or hundreds of thousands, perhaps?)
interesting! Somehow it doesn't seem those are at fidelity what sony was producing, since it doesn't need to be - requirements are different. Maybe we can have US army order a few for us SNES guys, since they're also SNES guys? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-purpose_Arcade_Combat_Si...
Reminds me of how the actual Marines modified Doom with realistic weapons, locations, and enemies to turn it into a simulator for drilling fireteam tactics:
I saw the prototype at gamescom, too. I was there with a friend. When we noticed that it was not a true vector display, we were both bewildered. What's the point?
On the Vectrex you could only draw lines between 256 x 256 grid points, so in theory 800 x 600 with antialiasing would be enough. But dunno if it would have the same contrast, OLED is as good as you can get I guess.
On a tiny screen like that, I suspect 800x600 is probably high enough DPI to fake the lines themselves well enough to the point where the pixels aren't discernable to the eye.
This alone still wouldn't remotely resemble a real vector display...
They would also need to accurately simulate the glow/bloom of the lines, and the phosphor decay rate over time that leads to effects like the "trail" behind the bullets in Asteroids. That is all extremely feasible. In a lot of ways, much easier than emulating a raster CRT display.
However, I have never seen a commercial emulation product do this with any competency.
Presumably because the number of people who would actually care is not large enough to affect the sales figures in any meaningful way.
Not really. One of the advantages of vector displays is the fact that the drawn lines are razor sharp with zero aliasing. Another is the fact that the hardware has very fine control over the brightness, allowing for very bright or very dim lines to be drawn. The bright ones are brighter than could be replicated with raster CRT displays, and combined with slow-decay phosphors made for some beautiful "trail" effects. A pixelated display of any sort can only yield a rough approximation at best.
and combined with slow-decay phosphors made for some beautiful "trail" effects
Thank you. This is such an under-appreciated aspect of vector games' unique look on real hardware.
A pixelated display of any sort can only yield a rough approximation at best.
Why do you feel this way? With sufficient DPI, to me this is fairly easy to achieve. A few examples of emulation that look like they're doing a very good job:
I think they have the bloom dialed up way too high, and maybe the trails aren't prominent enough, but I assume those are easy things to tweak.
Last time I played a well-maintained Asteroids cabinet, bullets had obvious bloom, but I was surprised to not see a trail. There wasn't any noticeable bloom or trails on the other objects. I believe the arcade monitors have fast decay phosphor like in regular TV sets, so any trail would come from persistence of vision, probably due to the brightness of the bullet.
I'm not sure about the Vectrex CRT, it may have longer persistence phosphor.
The Asteroids I've played had a slow-decay phosphor and trails on the bullets (not so much the asteroids, UFOs, etc). If the cabinet you played had its tube replaced with a TV picture tube, its display characteristics may have changed.
The bloom might be all right if they could replicate the intensity. Maybe with an OLED and sufficient HDR color depth, but I'm not seeing that here. It doesn't look like they did much CRT effect processing on the second two. The fireballs in Star Wars should glow the way the bullets in Asteroids do (albeit with quicker phosphor decay so not much in the way of trails).
At least they went with OLED, which is as close as you can get with technology that's still in mass production. It would be a crime to use LCD for this.
But the resolution is too low to do it justice. They’d need a high dpi display with crazy good beam emulation to be even close to pulling off something acceptable. Just can’t see it with this.
It's funny that you don't really get an impression of what this is all about on the front page. I don't know what a Vectrex is, and I'm confused. Something with games I guess.
Yeah, maybe you're expected to be of a certain age or into retro underdog gaming systems? It was upvoted to the front page so…
Yeah, Vectrex was a vector gaming platform (as opposed to bitmap) that came and went in the 80's. Vector arcade games were a kind of niche anyway — like "Asteroids", "Battlezone", "Tempest" and a Star Wars game. But they were also kind of magical. The Vectrex captured that.
As someone who grew up with these machines back in the day, there was something very magical about having a Vectrex near ones bed, all the lights off, and being able to play as much “Asteroids”, “Battlezone”, or “Tempest” as one could handle without requiring a bag full of coins for the pleasure. I fondly recall the nights spent this way, waking up at 3am with the Vectrex splash screen still burning its way into my retina.
That crazy glow was just so sci-fi for us kids back then. Some of us only had Game & Watch (LCD cells) to play with - the rich kids with their Vectrex were constant subjects of envy among us nerd kids.
I was lucky enough to get a microcomputer for one of my teenage birthdays - my rich neighbor had a Vectrex. We both kind of tired of our respective systems and on occasion would swap for the weekend .. it was great to have some actual games to play, and my friend enjoyed learning to program on my Oric-1 (which had a distinct lack of titles, at least in my neck of the woods back then ..)
I played the vector Star Wars game in a cabinet with a seat and hydraulic actuators way back, I always wondered if those were common or not, I never saw another one.
Vectrex was an old game console with an integral CRT, famous for the "vector scan" CRT it used.
Basically the only new principle involved is that instead of cathode ray beams always scanning on a fixed rectangular pattern, the X and Y deflection amounts were provided by the game to move around the singular dot to desired locations.
It's crisp as waving around a laser pointer. Some people like that aesthetics.
> A second controller can be purchased separately and will include a dongle to connect it to the original console.
This is a fascinating feature .. so the new controller can be used on older Vectrex(es)? Nice!
I sure look forward to seeing new Vectrex titles released once the Vectrex Mini hits the scene and lands in the right hackers’ hands. Will there be some kind of open SDK or something, for this purpose - anyone know?
My friend had one of these when we were little kids and I remember being impressed by how smooth and high-quality the joystick felt. This was mid-80s so maybe it’s because the competition was lacking.
Also, I’m pretty sure this was the only Vectrex within ~40,000km^2 of where I grew up.
Seriously, it's clear to see way ahead of its release there is zero chance this thing will replicate the unique experience of the vectrex.
This is just a cheap cash grab which will misrepresent what the vectrex was all about and what playing it felt like. Add this to the pile of worthless nostalgia devices.
There is just no reason for this to exist other to exploit the nostalgia and then immediately disappoint the owner of this product.
How on earth is this better than a raspberry pi with an emulator and an oled monitor? Who the hell needs this vendor to put it a box? Did you notice "injection mold plastic" is literally the first and most prominent feature of this thing? What an utter abysmal joke.
I wish these poor remakes and nostalgia releases fully commit to what they're trying to do. If you can't, just don't do it! We don't need your facsimile junk.
I guess for Nostalgia? I hadn't heard of this machine before at all. It doesn't look like the games would be that appealing either. I guess I did buy the mini SNES even though it has similar issues.
This object makes sense to me only if, even if there is a display, which is fundamentally different than tracing line with the CRT raster, at least that original process is simulated. If the lines buffer is rendered just with a line drawing algorithm where the line is uniform, I kinda fail to see the point of emulating an object like that. Sure, still kinda a nice gadget, but... And, the ESP32 inside tells me that it is hardly a physical simulation of the CRT reactive surface and the electrons beam. The point of this device was the way the lines were traced without the help of the main CPU of the device, and in a way where pixels didn't make any sense at all. They are lines at the lower of the levels. Failing to do that in the emulation is kinda betraying the device.
- The lines themselves which are honestly the easiest part to fake if the DPI is high enough, past the point of visual distinction.
- The "bloom" or "glow" (phosphor bleed, or whatever the right term is) around the lines
- The temporal effects caused by the screen phosphor continuing to glow even after the beam no longer hits them. The most obvious example is the "streak" left behind the ultra-bright moving bullets in Asteroids which looks absolutely awesome
I have seen incredible examples of vector/CRT emulation when people get creative with RetroArch (or whatever) GPU powered shaders.The only things that emulation can't match (for me) are input latency and the magic of knowing that the process of creating the image is "real" and not "faked."
Utopia Must Fall (https://store.steampowered.com/app/2849680/Utopia_Must_Fall/) does some wonderful things in this domain.
That looks really cool!
They also make Grid Ranger ... which gives me Gridrunner + Tempest + Star Wars vibes.
https://store.steampowered.com/app/2964400/Grid_Ranger/
I remember people on HN arguing with me years ago that digital was better than analog/vinyl.
I lived through the 70s and 80s and nothing is the same as CRTs and actual vector graphics the way they were meant to be: shooting electrons at your head, making your eyes red, probably increasing cancer rates, and looking fucking awesome. Nothing beats them. I miss TV snow and I miss real vector graphics.
But can it get bright enough to match the intensity of a CRT vector screen concentrating the light on a single point?
> A vector display is visually unique for a few reasons.
Agreed. I'd add to your list the unique way vector displays are brighter and have more bloom at the intersections where two line endpoints overlap due to being double traced.
I agree totally. Seeing one of the real devices with my own eyes was almost a surreal experience - I almost couldn't believe how good it looked given A) the age and B) the size. Such a neat device
Yeah they're clearly not targeting people that have played a vectrex in their youth.
The games were nothing to write home about, but the rendering was fun.
You could emulate it with a slow rendering and fade (clear frame with black 99% opacity), but it would have to be perfect. Still, you'd never get the same glow on the drawing point.
Agreed. I read
And my first thought was "but if it has a resolution of 800x600, then they're not vector graphics, are they"> The Vectrex Mini captures the full spirit of the original Vectrex [...] AMOLED display with a resolution of 800×600
I played many hours on a Vectrex, and I'd say that the true vector graphics was the spirit.
If this project is able to capture that spirit in 800x600 AMOLED, that will be very impressive, and I will be curious how they did it.
Edit: The Vectrex was a nice piece of creative engineering, within the constraints and opportunities of the time, on a wonderful product. I suppose (if you look at the comments here) it's difficult to make an homage to such a beloved thing, and hit the best notes in how you reveal it. This Mini looks impressive, and hopefully recaptures some of the magic.
<scans description for display technology>
AMOLED
<closes tab>
I would pay a LOT for a true vector display, and I would pay even more than that for a vector display systems that can play faithful recastings of Tempest and Asteroids.
I can already play vector games on rasterized displays. I don't need an injection molded cabinet.
> "the console features a built-in 5-inch AMOLED display with a resolution of 800×600, delivering sharp and bright vector graphics"
So ... NOT vector graphics. Rasterized bitmap versions of vector graphics.
EDIT: Sorry, I'm not saying this isn't cool. I know rasterizing a vector to a sharp bitmapped display can still allow effects to simulate continuously drawn vector artifacts e.g. thin lines, thicker at vertices, refresh, flicker, etc.
I feel like a higher resolution OLED would serve this much better.
I have a working Vectrex I found on the street 12 years ago sitting in my living room.
Nothing matches the pinpoint of light dancing around that Vectrex provides. I'm not sure it's feasible to sell something based on vector graphics like Vectrex did, but it would be way cooler!
Maybe a raster display could match it, but it would need more dynamic range and much better resolution, plus processing power to perpetrate a screen-wide simulation of the glowing phosphor.
This is the opposite of what I'd want. Give me an actual vector display, and double the screen size. This is just going to provide an experience like myriad chinese handheld emulators.
We’d need to restart supply chains that haven’t been active for decades in order to manufacture the required CRTs.
Yeah, not really the same. I had a really really complete Vectrex setup, every game (even the stupid ones :-)) AND their overlays, I'm pretty sure every accessory. Which I ended up selling to a guy doing a museum?[1] Anyway it was quite the game for me. I knew eventually it would stop working and then just be a memory but still.
The screen was what really made it, and I get that having a vector scope manufactured would be expensive (it isn't true that nobody makes CRTs any more, but it is true that they don't come cheaply). Its also the reason I never really went all the way and bought one of my all time favorite arcade games which was the cockpit version of 'Star Wars' with its color vector display. (even harder to store!)
In a related effort, I looked at replicating a CRT "look" for some older test equipment that came with CRTs using a high dpi IPS display. I probably could have succeeded if I had an FPGA for doing the phosphor simulation (I developed a lot of respect for Tektronix's DPO technology and their patent portfolio on same :-). Very much a diminishing returns kind of thing.
[1] If you're that guy and reading this say "hi" :-)
I wonder if an FPGA is still necessary. 4k/8k are running way over 60 fps these days. Presumably a gpu could do a decent job emulating the phosphor.
In related news, atari 2600 emulators are keeping 4-8 cores > 50% busy these days. How else do you get accurate ntsc “red blur”, and capacitor effects from blinking pixels?
I suppose it would depend on how you wanted to simulate it. In my case I was targeting taking the signal from an unmodified test instrument that thought it was talking to a CRT and using that to figure out what display it wanted. That would be equivalent to taking the X/Y/Intensity lines from the mainboard of a Vectrex and just doing what the vector scope would have done. I drilled down enough to find the non-linear, temperature dependent, curve of phosphor decay times on the CRT used in some HP gear. It was pretty wild. If you buy third party kits they don't even bother simulating phosphor. Instead they just take the signals, figure out the information content of the display, and put that on an LCD. (Monochrome generally)
We still get cathode ray oscilloscopes. Apparently the og has a grid screen. Wonder what it costs to get a CRT maker to get custom dimensions, phosphor colors, curvature etc?
AliExpress has these 4-inch "flat CRTs" that look like they scan the vertical axis onto a sort of parabolic screen. I've thought about playing with one, but decided I don't want to risk shocking myself for a tiny distorted image. Still have no idea for which application they're intended.
https://www.aliexpress.com/i/3256805660504572.html
Those were used in a lot of doorbell cameras until 2010s, then replaced by LCDs.
They make handheld gameboys nowadays :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irHI_2WdQXc
Alternatively, apparently you can make a true vector display by steering a laser.
Here's a DIY example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdo3djJrw9o
I suppose you could even point that at a screen with phosphors on it for a more CRT-like effect. (Maybe you'd need a different kind of phosphor since you'd be exciting it with visible light rather than with an electron beam, though.)
> We still get cathode ray oscilloscopes
Do we? I was under the impression that CRTs were not being manufactured anywhere anymore. I could definitely be wrong, but I couldn't find anything with a quick search.
Are there any CRT manufacturers left?
Yes.
https://www.thomaselectronics.com/
But they're only building them for specialty niche military and industrial applications (e.g., replacement parts for old fighter jet HUDs). You could ask them about building one for your SNES setup or old arcade machine, but it'll cost you call-for-pricing dollars (tens or hundreds of thousands, perhaps?)
interesting! Somehow it doesn't seem those are at fidelity what sony was producing, since it doesn't need to be - requirements are different. Maybe we can have US army order a few for us SNES guys, since they're also SNES guys? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-purpose_Arcade_Combat_Si...
Reminds me of how the actual Marines modified Doom with realistic weapons, locations, and enemies to turn it into a simulator for drilling fireteam tactics:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Doom
I have a brilliant idea. Let's bring manufacturing back to America, but let's exclusively build "vintage" technology.
Thing is, probably a ton of manufacturing gotchas and even know-hows of technologies of ye olde are already lost to time.
Thing is, if they can engineer it then, we can certain engineer it now.
I wonder if you could emulate a vectrex with vector laser projector.
Agree. I'm disappointed.
> Experience the spirit of the original Vectrex in a modern, compact format.
Emphasis on "spirit" I guess? Without the vector display it's an emulator in an (admittedly) handsome enclosure.
A modern version of a device with one unique feature... missing that unique feature
I played a prototype version of it at gamescom. It's pretty good. The graphics look good enough to emulate the original display technology.
I saw the prototype at gamescom, too. I was there with a friend. When we noticed that it was not a true vector display, we were both bewildered. What's the point?
Doesn't seem high enough resolution.
On the Vectrex you could only draw lines between 256 x 256 grid points, so in theory 800 x 600 with antialiasing would be enough. But dunno if it would have the same contrast, OLED is as good as you can get I guess.
On a tiny screen like that, I suspect 800x600 is probably high enough DPI to fake the lines themselves well enough to the point where the pixels aren't discernable to the eye.
This alone still wouldn't remotely resemble a real vector display...
They would also need to accurately simulate the glow/bloom of the lines, and the phosphor decay rate over time that leads to effects like the "trail" behind the bullets in Asteroids. That is all extremely feasible. In a lot of ways, much easier than emulating a raster CRT display.
However, I have never seen a commercial emulation product do this with any competency.
Presumably because the number of people who would actually care is not large enough to affect the sales figures in any meaningful way.
Not really. One of the advantages of vector displays is the fact that the drawn lines are razor sharp with zero aliasing. Another is the fact that the hardware has very fine control over the brightness, allowing for very bright or very dim lines to be drawn. The bright ones are brighter than could be replicated with raster CRT displays, and combined with slow-decay phosphors made for some beautiful "trail" effects. A pixelated display of any sort can only yield a rough approximation at best.
I think they have the bloom dialed up way too high, and maybe the trails aren't prominent enough, but I assume those are easy things to tweak.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4lHsVueSj0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtUtfBWDgmA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKjs1rWnwSk
Last time I played a well-maintained Asteroids cabinet, bullets had obvious bloom, but I was surprised to not see a trail. There wasn't any noticeable bloom or trails on the other objects. I believe the arcade monitors have fast decay phosphor like in regular TV sets, so any trail would come from persistence of vision, probably due to the brightness of the bullet.
I'm not sure about the Vectrex CRT, it may have longer persistence phosphor.
The Asteroids I've played had a slow-decay phosphor and trails on the bullets (not so much the asteroids, UFOs, etc). If the cabinet you played had its tube replaced with a TV picture tube, its display characteristics may have changed.
The bloom might be all right if they could replicate the intensity. Maybe with an OLED and sufficient HDR color depth, but I'm not seeing that here. It doesn't look like they did much CRT effect processing on the second two. The fireballs in Star Wars should glow the way the bullets in Asteroids do (albeit with quicker phosphor decay so not much in the way of trails).
Why disagree with a first hand account without any personal experience yourself?
Having seen a real one in action it seems kinda pointless without it having a true vector display.
Interesting, but a Vectrex without a vector display is like a fish without water.
At least they went with OLED, which is as close as you can get with technology that's still in mass production. It would be a crime to use LCD for this.
But the resolution is too low to do it justice. They’d need a high dpi display with crazy good beam emulation to be even close to pulling off something acceptable. Just can’t see it with this.
It’s a 5 inch display. 800x600 in that size is hard to see already.
What I’m curious is how far they can push the brightness and how quickly the processor can fade the whole frame buffer.
It's funny that you don't really get an impression of what this is all about on the front page. I don't know what a Vectrex is, and I'm confused. Something with games I guess.
Yeah, maybe you're expected to be of a certain age or into retro underdog gaming systems? It was upvoted to the front page so…
Yeah, Vectrex was a vector gaming platform (as opposed to bitmap) that came and went in the 80's. Vector arcade games were a kind of niche anyway — like "Asteroids", "Battlezone", "Tempest" and a Star Wars game. But they were also kind of magical. The Vectrex captured that.
As someone who grew up with these machines back in the day, there was something very magical about having a Vectrex near ones bed, all the lights off, and being able to play as much “Asteroids”, “Battlezone”, or “Tempest” as one could handle without requiring a bag full of coins for the pleasure. I fondly recall the nights spent this way, waking up at 3am with the Vectrex splash screen still burning its way into my retina.
That crazy glow was just so sci-fi for us kids back then. Some of us only had Game & Watch (LCD cells) to play with - the rich kids with their Vectrex were constant subjects of envy among us nerd kids.
I was lucky enough to get a microcomputer for one of my teenage birthdays - my rich neighbor had a Vectrex. We both kind of tired of our respective systems and on occasion would swap for the weekend .. it was great to have some actual games to play, and my friend enjoyed learning to program on my Oric-1 (which had a distinct lack of titles, at least in my neck of the woods back then ..)
I played the vector Star Wars game in a cabinet with a seat and hydraulic actuators way back, I always wondered if those were common or not, I never saw another one.
With the actuators... never seen one, and I saw many many of the sit down or the stand up cabinets.
First game I saw with merely lean based controls was hang on or space harrier, several years later.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say you found a highly custom cabinet, and I'm jealous.
Vectrex was an old game console with an integral CRT, famous for the "vector scan" CRT it used.
Basically the only new principle involved is that instead of cathode ray beams always scanning on a fixed rectangular pattern, the X and Y deflection amounts were provided by the game to move around the singular dot to desired locations.
It's crisp as waving around a laser pointer. Some people like that aesthetics.
The cult of Tempest says some people are obsessed with that aesthetic.
I thought this was going to be about https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBVmCFS2sYs where someone built a miniature handheld Vectrex with a real CRT.
Synthetic Vectrex!
As a kid, i had the 3D goggles. The rollercoaster simulation was pretty good!
> A second controller can be purchased separately and will include a dongle to connect it to the original console.
This is a fascinating feature .. so the new controller can be used on older Vectrex(es)? Nice!
I sure look forward to seeing new Vectrex titles released once the Vectrex Mini hits the scene and lands in the right hackers’ hands. Will there be some kind of open SDK or something, for this purpose - anyone know?
see also https://github.com/schlae/scopetrex with the plan to build a clone.
You need a XY Monitor - https://jmargolin.com/xy/xymon.htm
or if you have a normal CRT, you can add the XY kit: https://www.retrorgb.com/vector-monitor-xy-kit.html
My friend had one of these when we were little kids and I remember being impressed by how smooth and high-quality the joystick felt. This was mid-80s so maybe it’s because the competition was lacking.
Also, I’m pretty sure this was the only Vectrex within ~40,000km^2 of where I grew up.
It was probably because the joystick was analog (and self centering) which was pretty revolutionary at the time.
> AMOLED display with a resolution of 800×600
Seriously, it's clear to see way ahead of its release there is zero chance this thing will replicate the unique experience of the vectrex.
This is just a cheap cash grab which will misrepresent what the vectrex was all about and what playing it felt like. Add this to the pile of worthless nostalgia devices.
There is just no reason for this to exist other to exploit the nostalgia and then immediately disappoint the owner of this product.
How on earth is this better than a raspberry pi with an emulator and an oled monitor? Who the hell needs this vendor to put it a box? Did you notice "injection mold plastic" is literally the first and most prominent feature of this thing? What an utter abysmal joke.
I wish these poor remakes and nostalgia releases fully commit to what they're trying to do. If you can't, just don't do it! We don't need your facsimile junk.
I don't like how the proportions look all wrong. I haven't seen my Vectrex unit in a while but I don't think it had those proportions.
Probably impractical to source a viable CRT these days, but still a bit disappointing they couldn't use one
X, Y voltage (greyscale) output would allow you to attach an external oscilloscope.
That's the way to do it as a DIY version.
Literally impossible?
Logo on the box looks like "Vootrix"
The name Vectrex meant nothing to me, and the page was utterly unhelpful too. This helped:
https://youtu.be/AKf-k2IjUOo?t=604
Personal conclusion: meh.
Kickstarter? No thanks. But good luck.
I guess for Nostalgia? I hadn't heard of this machine before at all. It doesn't look like the games would be that appealing either. I guess I did buy the mini SNES even though it has similar issues.