Arcadia 2001:  Frequently Asked Questions
Version 2.99h -- June 4, 2002

TABLE OF CONTENTS

• Copyright notice

• Credits and contributions

• Other potential sources of information

• Where to find this document online

• Arcadia 2001: a historical overview

• Known clones of the Arcadia 2001

• Cartridge compatibility and related subjects

• Interton VC-4000 compatability:  the truth

• Interton VC-4000 compatability:  the proof

• Hardware specifications

• Power supply specs and replacement info

• Source for schematics, service manuals

• Pinout diagram: 2650A microprocessor

• Pinout diagram: Emerson family cart slot

• Pinout diagram: MPT-03 family cart slot

• Pinout diagram: Palladium family cart slot

• Pinout diagram: Ormatu family cart slot

• Pinout and cartridge comparison notes

• Aug 1980: Activision formed; first third-party software maker

• Jan 1981: Signetics manufactures early Arcadia 2001 ROMs

• Mar 1981: Hidden message inside an  Interton game program

• Nov 1981: Atari sues Philips over copyright violations

• Mar 1982: U.S. Trademark application: "Arcadia 2001"

• Apr 1982: Wall Street Journal: business plans announced

• Jun 1982: "Computer and Video Games" magazine preview

• Jul 1982: Hidden message inside an Arcadia 2001 game

• Jul 1982: "Pac-Man bites K.C. Munchkin"

• Aug 1982: "Atari declares copyright war on Pac-Man rivals"

• Sep 1982: "Pac-Man reigns supreme"

• Sep 1982: "Emerson unveils Arcadia 2001"

• Oct 1982: General Instruments makes Crazy Climber ROMs

• Nov 1982: "Emerson Arcadia 2001 - A Gamer's Evaluation"

• Mar 1983: "Arcadia to change name"

• Apr 1983: "Atari attacks Demon Attack"

• Apr 1983: "Coleco, Atari cross swords"

• May 1998: Usenet posting regarding 2600 ports by UA

Copyright notice & disclaimer

Copyright (c) 1999, 2002 Ward Shrake.
All rights reserved.

Permission is hereby granted for non-commercial uses
of this text. Please credit those who worked hard to
bring you this text, just as we took pains to do so.

This document is a derivative work. It is based on a
text written by Sylvain De Chantal. Sylvain was assisted
by the individuals shown below. All contributors retain
the full copyright to their individual contributions.

The data contained herein is provided for information
purposes only. It should never be considered as an
absolute. This is because we are unpaid volunteers
who are getting this information from sources that
are at times questionable, however well intended.
This problem is compounded by speculation based
upon what we know or believe at any given point.
In short, a lot of the time we are just guessing.

This text is supplied free of any charge. No warranty
is given or implied with regards to the accuracy of this
text. Use the information found here at your own risk.

Credit for contributors, past and present
Listed in alphabetical order

Carlo Altieri

Daniel Amend

Olivier Boisseau

Anthony Brown

James Carter

Greg Chance

William E. Combs

Jonathan H. Davidson

Michael "Pinwhiz" Davidson

Sylvain De Chantal

Dean Dierschow

Martin Gansel

Leonard Herman

Rene Kamerbeek

Rikard Ljungkvist

Michael J. Novak Jr.

Rayth Orlea

Russ Perry Jr.

PeT

Stefan Piasecki

Matt Reichert

Paul Robson

Lee Romanow

Joe Santulli

Ward Shrake

Jack Spencer Jr.

Jay Tilton

Bruce Tomlin

Tom Zjaba

Internet sites where you can locate this document Digital Press hosts Ward Shrake's "Digital Archaeology" web sites. They will have the latest version of the FAQ. http://www.digitpress.com/

Arcadia 2001: a historical overview

Virtually everything that people once thought they knew about this system has proven itself to be incorrect. We few who consider ourselves historians and researchers of video game history are slowly beginning to see the real story more clearly.

We now see Emerson as being the rough equivalent of an actor that only has scenes in the second act of a three-act play. We learned that someone else created and marketed the system. Emerson merely said "yes" when this unknown company gave them the opportunity to license their "Arcadia 2001" game system for sale within the United States. That cuts Emerson out of the first act of the play; the system's creation. That logically must have taken place during late 1981 or early 1982. We learned that something important which preceeded this particular console's creation was happening during 1981, giving us a "couldn't be before this" date. We know that most of the actual sales activity of this particular console took place during the latter part of 1982, so the system's creation had to have taken place between those time periods. Most of the software created for this system shows dates of 1982. A smaller amount of non-US titles appeared during 1983. However, Emerson as a company had already decided to abandon both "their" console and the gaming market in or around 1983.

Now that we know this about Emerson, we can push that information aside and focus instead on the unknown parties that really did design and create and market both the hardware and the software for the Arcadia 2001. Emerson was only one company among many that licensed this hardware system and sold it within one geographic area. Some of these companies made efforts to appear like they had created this system. One by one, we are eliminating most of them as "possibles". The sheer number of different-looking consoles and cartridges, spread widely across the entire planet, slows this effort down.

Even back in the days when collectors and video game historians honestly believed that Emerson was pulling all the strings, we knew that there were half a dozen or more non-US companies that had licensed this technology from someone and had made a cartridge-compatible clone of their own, for sale within their geographic area. Most of these "clone" systems looked very similar to the console that Emerson had released for use in the United States; some were identical except for the name on the console itself. A few of these non-US consoles looked considerably different. However different these consoles may have looked from one another on the outside, they had the same technology inside. The cartridge slot was also identical. As a result any of these consoles would accept and play cartridges made for any of the other systems from this console family.

In terms of historical understanding, our single largest leap forward came when we discovered that there were more than one of these family types. Certain collectors around the world were fond of finding any cartridge or console that was unusual or odd. As their collections grew in size and diversity they began to notice that games for what we now think of as the "MPT-03 family" of consoles, were very similar to the games made for the more familiar "Emerson family" of consoles.

One of these collectors mailed some of his MPT-03 cartridges to Ward Shrake, since he had enough technical expertise to be able to examine them well in detail. Ward played "hardware detective" with these cartridges, studying their cartridge slot and memory chip configuration until he could successfully "dump" (read and store) the program content of these cartridges. Similar efforts had already taken place on the Emerson family, thanks to Jay Tilton, so there were enough known-good ROM image files from both console families to allow comparison. Checking the most common cartridges from each family type showed the programs to be 100% identical internally. As any technically inclined person can tell you, there is simply no way this could be possible unless the systems that they plugged into were also 100% identically internally. None at all.

At that time, we proudly announced our discovery -- see the detailed list of credits contained in this FAQ -- to other fans of the so-called "Emerson system". Ward announced it both online and in print; by then he had taken over the Arcadia 2001 section found within the printed publication called the "Digital Press Collectors Guide". (See version 6, released in February of 2001. A perfect year to have announced such an important confirmed discovery about a system named the "2001"!)

Long story short, as of March 2002 with the next version of the DPCG book's publishing deadline quickly approaching, Ward is happy to report that our understanding of the global complexities of this group of consoles has really improved. For instance, we have now positively identified four total cartridge families now instead of just two. The Emerson family was known from the beginning; collectors across the globe became simply aware of that largely self-evident relationship, simply by exchanging cartridges and plugging them into their nearly-identical looking consoles. Michael Davidson of New Zealand helped to identify the MPT-03 as a ROM-compatible family... even though the carts were not slot-compatible. Stefan Piasecki of Germany next helped to identify the Palladium console as a third family type. Rene Kamerbeek of the Netherlands helped to identify the Ormatu console as a fourth family type. All ROM-compatible but not slot-compatible.

I am going to close this section of the FAQ now, and move on. This does not mean the story ends here. We still have a lot we would like to find out about this mysterious group of people that created the Arcadia 2001 console group. The things I have discussed so far have been confirmed through rigorous study, observation, research and so on. The next part of the story is still under investigation, and contains much more speculation, historically speaking. I'd rather wait until we know what we are talking about with a reasonable degree of certainty, than to prematurely publish simple speculation here.

The next section of this FAQ may interest those of you who want to find out more about this company's activities. There is at least one major discovery we have not discussed yet; the reality that the Arcadia 2001 was NOT the first console group created by these people. In fact, a technologically similar group of consoles I refer to collectively as the "Interton-VC4000" console group, came before the "Arcadia 2001" console group. These systems have now been proven to be completely incompatible with one another, in any commonly understood way of describing that term. But since that is a discussion that really belongs elsewhere, I will end this part of the FAQ now and resume the discussion in this FAQ's next section.

Go to the top of this page

Cartridge compatibility and related subjects

You may have noticed all the unusual terminology I'm using here? These terms are the author's idea of how best to try to clarify and explain this situation, which he realizes must be confusing to non-technical people. It is not so much that Ward loves talking about technology, when describing this system's history. There just seems like no way to do so without it!

One other new term is "console group". To avoid confusing people that are new to this subject -- which is probably just about everyone reading this -- Ward adapted a term he saw used by Olivier Boisseau on his "old-computers.com" web site. It was here that Ward began looking into his next big discovery in regards to the global nature of the Arcadia 2001. Olivier's experience with many different consoles made by many different non-US companies led him to try to invent a way to classify and categorize them, so he could better discuss them to his web site's readers. He began thinking of any console that was similar to another console as part of a "console group". The combined result of Ward's and Olivier's attempts to summarize things is as follows.

Any single machine that plays games is considered to be a "game console". Many of these exist throughout the world. Any given game console has a specific type of cartridge that can be plugged into it and played. If two seperate consoles share a common cartridge slot configuration, they are said to be "slot-compatible". However, be careful not to assume too much, too quickly! This does NOT in itself mean that these two consoles will allow you to mix and match games. There are many standardized card edge connectors used within the electronics industry. For instance, the cartridge slot connector used on the MPT-03 family is visually identical to those used on the Ormatu family, the Commodore VIC-20 home computer, and many arcade games manufactured in the early 1980's. None of these electronic devices will understand or be able to use a plug-in cartridge from any of the other devices. Electronics are much more precise and unforgiving than that! Think of it this way; if you press even one incorrect button while dialing a phone number, you do NOT get to talk to the person you had hoped you would. If you read a street address incorrectly, you could end up miles away from where you hoped to end up. ("123 N. Any Street" is NOT identical to "123 S. Any Street" at all; they are in two seperate ends of the same town.) To avoid being overly-technical in my discussion, I'm going to simply hope you take my word on it; slot-compatibility is just one thing that must be common to any two consoles, if you hope to be able to interchange game cartridges and play them.

"ROM-compatible" is the next new term. In other words the program contents stored within two different cartridge famiies may or may not be identical. Again, please take my word for this; if even ONE byte is not EXACTLY where it is supposed to be and what it is supposed to be, the odds are heavily in favor of the idea that you will not be able to play the game on any console it was not designed for. One family's cartridges will not work directly on the other family's console, unless they are both slot-compatible and ROM-compatible. It is simply impossible; it will not work, no matter how much you want it to. However, note the word "directly" in that sentence; it is important. You can create an adapter device to allow one game console's carts on another console, so long as the only problem is that their slot is not compatible. If the slots are different but the cartridges are completely ROM-compatible internally, then under certain circumstances you can interchange games.

I apologize for all these new terms, and for what are likely new concepts to many non-technical people. Unfortunately, trying to describe things accurately demands that I lay a firm foundation first, before I move on to my next subject.

We now have the terms "console" and "family" and "slot-compatible" and "ROM-compatible". As used here, a "console group" is the entire collection of all of the consoles that do, in fact, allow you to play each other's games. You may have to use some sort of home-made adapter to get past slot-compatability problems, but once you do, there is very little practical difference between one console and another. The end result is that you can plug games in, and they will work.

This last term may or may not seem important or necessary, at first. Sadly enough, without the term "console group" things would soon become completely unmanagable! I say that with firm conviction and no exaggeration, because our research has just now (March 2002) made the discovery that the "Arcadia 2001" group of consoles was preceeded by an older group of consoles called the "Interton-VC4000". The games look like they are roughly equivalent at a glance.

Since that was all the "seed" that it initially took to begin the research that led to the discovery that the MPT-03 and Emerson families were related, despite apparent differences, some collectors and historians have now begun to assume too much, in some cases. They see a game that looks similar, and have begun to automatically think, "Hey, this console looks like it is another one of the families that must belong to the Arcadia 2001 group of consoles." That is dangerous!

That is a good observation in itself, but unfortunately -- or fortunately, depending on your point of view as a collector or a historian -- most of the simiarities end there. Ward feels that he has very scientifically proven the idea that the Arcadia 2001 console group is a completely seperate entity from the Interton-VC4000 console group. (There is another whole section of this FAQ that deals with nothing but that subject, including precisely how Ward reached that conclusion.)

For the limited purposes of this section of the FAQ, please just take my word on it for it. Pleaes keep reading... with an open mind. I realize that I am human, as we all are, and that we all make mistakes. However, please remember that I am also the person that single-handedly did all of the actual technical research necessary to have positively confirmed that there was indeed some level of compatability between what once looked like completely different game consoles. Does this mean that I "know everything" and that my word on a subject should simply be accepted without question? No.

However, I do not really think that I know nothing, and should be ignored, either. I do not feel the need to "establish my credentials" on this particular subject, but for the record please consider this well. If I can be allowed to explain to all interested parties within the classic gaming community that some seemingly-unrelated and seemingly-incompatible game console families are in fact really just part of one big console group, then it stands to reason that those same people should be willing to listen to me when I speak out and say that just the opposite is true in some cases. It is only fair?

If I say that some game consoles do not belong within the Arcadia 2001 group then that ought to have some credence, just as it was slowly-but-surely accepted that my earlier theory was correct. No one took my word for it then, and I did not expect them to. In that case, I asked other technical people to independently confirm my findings. And they did. It would not bother me in the least if other technical people choose to independently confirm my more recent findings.

One last bit of explanation, and then I'll move on to the FAQ's next subject. We had collectively found published news reports that had said that the Arcadia 2001 console (group) had been based upon the earlier Interton-VC4000 console (group). We knew that, or had heard that, "all along". However, it takes so much time and effort and painstaking research to actually confirm most of the statements that various companies had made back then, that we had no idea what to make of this brief sentence or two of text, before we'd begun to narrow down the related technical issues more clearly.

Arcadia 2001: International listing of known members of this console group

List also includes names of some similar-looking consoles that
DO NOT actually belong to this console group. This is so you
can better avoid confusing the two incompatible console groups
any more than is necessary. (We apologize for the complexity
of all this! Please remember that we are "just the messengers"!)

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

This is NOT a member of the "Arcadia 2001" console group

Definitions of terms used above:

• "Console name" -- The name that is on the specific console or its packaging.
• "Company Name (Licensee)" -- The company name that is listed on the specific console or its packaging.
• "Family" -- What cartridge family does this system belongs to? This indicates the cartridge slot type used, which in turn determines which cartridge family of games can be played on this console just by plugging the cart in.
• "Country" -- Primary geographic area where the specific console was generally sold.
• "TV" -- Is the console set up to use NTSC (North American) or PAL (European) standard televisions?
• "PCB" -- What company name is indicated on the actual circuit boards? (Actual manufacturer, not a licensee.)
• "Built where" -- Where was the console actually built, according to notices on its housing or its circuit boards?
• "Case type" --this column is simply my attempt to summarize what the console's plastic housing looks like.

The "Arcadia 2001" console group is a completely different
animal than the "Interton VC-4000" console group. Please
do not confuse these two very different console groups with one another!

Yes, they do seem like they are sort of related. And in some ways they are.
They share some common history in terms of who made the machines.
The hardware inside both groups is similar enough to make people wonder,
since both groups use a Signetics 2650 CPU and Signetics 263x co-processor.
At least one programmer definitely worked on games for both groups.

However....

Games from one console group WILL NOT WORK when used on the other group.
You cannot make or buy any kind of an adapter that will allow the two
console groups to use each other's cartridges. We tried it. It did not work.
This is NOT an educated guess! This is tested scientific fact!
In the absence of equally valid scientific testing, we consider the matter closed.

People who agree with this include:

Ward Shrake: this FAQ's author and the person who first
told you all that the Emerson family of Arcadia 2001 clones
was ROM-compatible but not slot-compatible with these
other Arcadia clone families: MPT-03, Palladium and Ormatu.

PeT: the author of the MESS emulator for both of these console groups.

Michael "Pinwhiz" Davidson: avid collector of obscure carts and consoles.

Believe me, we all regret that things are this complicated!
Really. It is not Ward's intent to "yell at" anyone in regards to
this matter. It is a fair question to have asked, based upon a
good set of observations by various people around the world.
Ward loves seeing such good observation and good analysis.

But some people do not want to give up this cherished belief
for reasons we find puzzling. If we have hurt anyone's feelings
or disappointed their hopes; hey, we are sorry. But we would
be doing both ourselves and the community no favors at all if
we saw a myth, knew the truth, and did not report that truth.

If it makes any of you feel better, you can think of these two
console groups as being similar to concepts like the relationship
between the earlier Commodore VIC-20 and the later C64,
or the earlier Atari 2600 and the later Atari 5200 consoles.
That is roughly the relationship that we see between them.

• Games within the "Arcadia 2001" console group are ROM-compatible with one another. But from one "family" to another, these machines are NOT "slot-compatible" with one another. If you want to just buy a cartridge, plug it in, and have it work with no fuss, then you have to make sure the cartridge family matches the console family.
• Chris Hind, a collector from the U.K., reports that the older Interton console group DID indeed have an available adapter from an official source! "The difference is that Voltmace, a U.K. company, produced conversion devices that allowed its cartridges to play on the other two systems. I only have the convertor for the Interton VC4000 but I have the sales sheet for the Acetronic convertor - so I'm still hunting for that one :-)" There may or may not have ever been an official adapter device made and sold for the Arcadia 2001 console group, to allow people to play one family's games on another family's console.

Please note that a company still sells service manuals for the console that Emerson made. You can order one at this web address: http://servicemanuals.safeshopper.com/2/cat2.htm?547 (Look for the video game console "ADV-1" model number on their lists.) The company that sells those also sells manuals for other Emerson products. Their web address is: http://www.treasurechestcorp.com/

Plug's physical physical size is 5.5 mm outside diameter by 2.1 mm inside diameter. The Tip is "+" and the Ring is "-".

In Ward's experience, Radio Shack part number 273-1776 works fine. Get the "M" sized Adapt-a-plug (tm) adapter with it; it is Radio Shack part number 273-1716.

Rectification and DC power regulation is handled inside the console.

Go to the top of this page

List of internal components found in Emerson family systems
(Note that MPT-03 and Palladium systems have not been examined.)

• This is an 8-bit processor. It can directly address 32k of memory space, but only in banks of 8k each. May be clocked at 3.58 Mhz? By Signetics. Socketed chip.

• Features: capable of handling 4 'objects' (sprites?). Has a built-in alpha-numeric
  character generator ROM that includes letters, numbers and a few simple graphics
  shapes; sort of like a cut-down VIC-20 or C64 set of keyboard-based graphics. It has collision detection capabilities. It has an Analog-to-Digital converter with four inputs. By Signetics. Socketed on PC board.
• Note that the Interton VC4000 console has a 2636 co-processor; an earlier model of this same basic chip.

• Two models exist, depending on the game console's region of manufacture. For NTSC (North American) televisions, a 2622 chip is used. The 2621 model is the PAL-signal equivalent. By Signetics. Socketed on PC board.

• A total of 1024 bytes (1k) of RAM. Ignore any advertiser's claims that this system had anything more than that; 28k was a lie made up when Emerson found out that systems by Atari (5200) and Coleco (Colecovision) had much better specifications than their system. These memory chips are well-known and
  were in common use at the time; two of them adds up to 1024 total bytes of RAM. Socketed on PC board.

• Takes the 12 volt power input and converts it to a clean 5 volts. A fairly large heatsink is included so that the chip does not burn itself out too quickly.

Much of the data above originally came from Anthony Brown; it was in the original FAQ.

Pinout of the 2650A microprocessor

                  __________    __________ 
                 |          \__/          |
      -->  SENSE |  1                  40 | FLAG  -->
        <--  A12 |  2                  39 | Vcc
        <--  A11 |  3                  38 | CLOCK  <--
        <--  A10 |  4                  37 | /PAUSE  <--
         <--  A9 |  5                  36 | /OPACK  <--
         <--  A8 |  6                  35 | RUN../WAIT  -->
         <--  A7 |  7     Signetics    34 | INTACK  -->
         <--  A6 |  8       2650A      33 | D0  <-->
         <--  A5 |  9       micro-     32 | D1  <-->
         <--  A4 | 10     processor    31 | D2  <-->
         <--  A3 | 11                  30 | D3  <-->
         <--  A2 | 12                  29 | D4  <-->
         <--  A1 | 13                  28 | D5  <-->
         <--  A0 | 14                  27 | D6  <-->
     -->  /ADREN | 15                  26 | D7  <-->
      -->  RESET | 16                  25 | /DBUSEN  <--
    -->  /INTREQ | 17                  24 | OPREQ  -->
  <--  A14-D../C | 18                  23 | R../W  -->
 <--  A13-E../NE | 19                  22 | WRP  -->
     <--  M../IO | 20                  21 | GND
                 |________________________|

Notes:

• The diagram above was adapted by Ward Shrake (June 2001)
  from a text originally written in 1982-5 by Jonathan Bowen of the
  Programming Research Group, at the Oxford University Computing
  Laboratory, 8-11 Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3QD, England.

• Ward Shrake's Leisure-Vision system was disassembled to trace
  out some of the lines, above. (See below for cart port pinout.) Pin
  17 (/INTREQ) is permanently attached to +5 volts; therefore it can
  never go logic low. Pins 18, 20, 22, 34 and 35 are not hooked to
  anything at all on the console's motherboard. A8 through A12 seem
  to be hooked up to five volts through 2.2k ohm pull-up resistors.

Pinout of the Emerson family cartridge slot

Component side of the plug-in cartridge's PC board and the
rear side of a carts' outer plastic box. (This side faces the TV.)

  

(A12) 
 A13  D3  D4  D5  D6  D7  D0  D2  D1  NC  NC  NC  GND GND NC
 -=---=---=---=---=---=---=---=---=---------------=---=---=--
  1   3   5   7   9   11  13  15  17  19  21  23  25  27  29


  2   4   6   8   10  12  14  16  18  20  22  24  26  28  30 
 -=---=---=---=---=---=---=---=---=---=---=---=---=---=---=--
 GND +5V  A0  A1  A2  A3  A4  A5  A6  A7  A8  A9 A10 A11 A12
                                                         (/EN)    

         

Solder side of the plug-in cartridges but the plastic
cases' front label side. (This side faces the player.)

Pinout of the MPT-03 family cartridge slot
This pinout diagram is based on analysis of Grandstand Video Master carts,
supplemented by later analysis of standard MPT-03 carts and a Tempest console.

Component side of the plug-in cartridges / label side of the cart / side facing player.

                                                      /CE   /CE
    N     N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  B  N  A  N 
+5V C GND C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  *  C  *  C
-=-----=-----------------------------------------------=-----=----
 1  3  5  7  9  1  1  1  1  1  2  2  2  2  2  3  3  3  3  3  4  4
                1  3  5  7  9  1  3  5  7  9  1  3  5  7  9  1  3


 2  4  6  8  1  1  1  1  1  2  2  2  2  2  3  3  3  3  3  4  4  4
             0  2  4  6  8  0  2  4  6  8  0  2  4  6  8  0  2  4 
-=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-
 D  D  D  D  D  D  D  D  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  /
 7  6  5  4  3  2  1  0  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  1  1  1  E
                                                       2  0  1  N

Solder side of the plug-in cartridges / rear side of the cart / side facing the TV.

Pinout of the Palladium family cartridge slot
This pinout diagram is based on analysis of a few Palladium carts
compared to the known pinout of a 2364 chip. (8k ROM with 24 pins.)
The pin numbering was taken from notations etched onto the board itself.

Solder side of the plug-in cartridges' PC boards. Rear side of the cart.

             /                                               G  +
 D  D  D  D  C  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  5
 5  7  3  1  E  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  D  V
-=--=--=--=--=-----------------------------------------------=--=-
 2  2  2  1  1  1  1  1  1  1  1  1  1  9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1
 2  1  0  9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1  0


 2  2  2  2  2  2  2  3  3  3  3  3  3  3  3  3  3  4  4  4  4  4
 3  4  5  6  7  8  9  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  0  1  2  3  4
-=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-----------=--=-
 D  D  D  D  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  A  N  N  N  G  +
 6  4  2  0  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  1  1  1  C  C  C  N  5  
                                           0  1  2           D  V

Component side of the plug-in cartridges. Label side of the cart.

Pinout of the Ormatu family cartridge slot
This pinout diagram is based on analysis of three Ormatu carts; working
backwards from a known (2732) EPROM pinout to the edge connectors,
and then checking that information against a 2332 EPROM chip's board.
The pin numbering was taken from notations etched onto the board itself.

Solder side of the plug-in cartridges. Rear side of the cart.

                  /OE (EPROM)                   /CE (EPROM)      
                  NC (Masked ROM)               A12 (Masked ROM)
                   *                             *   
 G  +              *                    A        *
 N  5  N  N  N  N  *  N  N  A  A  A  A  1  N  N  *  D  D  D  D  N
 D  V  C  C  C  C  *  C  C  1  3  5  7  0  C  C  *  4  6  2  0  C
-=--=--------------=--------=--=--=--=--=--------=--=--=--=--=----
 2  2  2  2  2  2  2  3  3  3  3  3  3  3  3  3  3  4  4  4  4  4
 3  4  5  6  7  8  9  0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  0  1  2  3  4


 2  2  2  1  1  1  1  1  1  1  1  1  1  
 2  1  0  9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1  0  9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1
-=--=-----------------------=--=--=--=--=-----=--=--=--=--=--=----
 G  +  N  N  N  N  N  N  N  A  A  A  A  A  N  A  A  D  D  D  D  N 
 N  5  C  C  C  C  C  C  C  0  2  4  6  9  C  1  8  5  7  3  1  C
 D  V                                         1                  

Component side of the plug-in cartridges' PC boards. Label side of the cart.

Go to the top of this page

Go to the top of this page

Chronological Timeline

Just scroll downwards through the many published reports below.
Various gaps are filled with commentary as needed but as much as
possible, I would prefer to let the record speak for itself. As I find
more published news articles, press releases and so on, I will be
able to delete much of the commentary I have added as a temporary
stop-gap. Editorial comments added by the author of this FAQ have
been printed in italics and are also labeled as such to avoid confusion.
It may not be immediately clear why certain articles were reprinted;
in context with the other texts included here a "bigger picture" is seen.

While Activision would only create game programs that worked on the Atari 2600 VCS console, the appearance of the first fully independent, third-party software production company set the stage for many things to follow. It was common for game programmers in this period to feel under-appreciated and under-rewarded.

Go to the top of this page

Go to the top of this page

Go to the top of this page

Go to the top of this page

Quoting part of the actual Trademark application filed by the Emerson company to protect the trade name "Arcadia 2001" for use within the United States:

"Goods and Services Equipment Sold as a Unit for Playing
a Video Output Display Type Parlor Game;

DATE OF FIRST USE: 1982.03.26;

DATE OF FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 1982.03.26"

Jonathan told Ward in e-mail back in 1999, that "There is no current Canadian registration for Leisurevision nor Arcadia as a video game system (there *is* Arcadia ginger ale, however, registered in the 1950's!)"

We are still interested in tracking down who that company was. It is difficult to do, because so many of the licensees appear to have tried within their seperate regional markets, worldwide, to appear like the console and its games had been created by the licensee; with no mention of or easy way to back-track and find out who this mysterious company was. The best leads we have so far indicate a "best-guess" involving "UA Limited". They wrote most of the software for this system, according to copyright messages found on Emerson-family carts. Note that this official business press release refers to one company that both the hardware and software; so far, the only company we have been able to identify that appears to meet this criteria is "UA Limited". They may or may not have been based in Hong Kong. They may or may not have had offices elsewhere within the world.

Coupled with a trademark applications' stated "first use in commerce" date of March 26, 1982 you can clearly see that Emerson's early plans involved four months of unhurried preparation in getting "their" game console ready to go to market, a summer 1982 console release date, and six months of heavy profits leading up towards Christmas of 1982. (It is important to note this up front, because from now on things change very rapidly.)

Jonathan's added commentary:
(Quotes taken from private e-mails between Jonathan and Ward during 1999 when a few folks on the Internet were beginning to do serious research.) "The next mention of Emerson Radio Corp. in the WSJ (other than things like stock splits and dividends) occurs June 11, 1985 (p. 16, col.1). This article discusses the then current product line and makes absolutely no mention of the (apparently brief) foray into the video game business." Jonathan later said: "The Atari section of the WSJ index was even more fun to read -- announcements of MANY unreleased products and mergers that never happened. (E.g.. Atari and Activision jointly providing games by cable TV, Milton Bradley announced a voice synthesis *and recognition* device for the 2600 and 5200). One has to wonder if the people drafting press releases 1981-4 ever talked to engineers in the same company!!!"

Note that this announcement by Hanimex in the United Kingdom closely matches (in terms of earliest possible submission dates) to when Emerson in the United States was first beginning to become involved with marketing within their own seperate territory. This implies that there was a global efforts being made to license this console, by the parties that created it.

The system's stated launch date matches the date this magazine was on the newsstands, for whatever that particular observation is worth?

According to U.K. collector Chris Hind, "Swindon is in Wiltshire in the U.K., that's just outside Bristol in the South-West of the country."

Olivier Boisseau's Old-Computers.Com web site was the first big help that Ward Shrake located in trying to research this. Olivier had reported that this Interton-VC4000 was (a console group that was) similar to the Arcadia 2001 console (group) in terms of its technology. But with one critical difference; the Signetics brand model 2636 audio/visual co-processor chip used to power the Interton-VC4000 group was an older model than the Signetics 2637 chip used in the Arcadia 2001 console group, approximately one year later.

Not even Olivier knew for certain what that implied. Historians and collectors ocasionally debated the issue of whether or not these two console groups were capable of running one-another's software. Educated guesses were made by many but no proof was offered either way until March 2002. Having run a very thorough and rather scientific series of real-life tests, Ward is certain that there is ZERO software compatability between these two console groups. Ward recognizes that collectors may or may not disagree with his findings but he now considers this matter settled, once and for all... unless someone can prove with equally scientific zeal that there is tangible proof to the contrary.

Note that the already-existing Interton software library helps to explain where some of the Arcadia's more obscure, less-arcade-like games originally came from... and why they thought they could put so many new games on the market, so quickly. They were not starting from scratch, they were simply porting games over.

Note also that while a few non-technical collectors wonder aloud if existing Interton games could probably be rewritten to work on the Arcadia, that the point is largely moot... the company themselves has likely already done so.

• Phoenix = the legalized Space Vultures, without the mothership, and possibly an earlier pre-legalization version that did have that stage.
• Defender = Space Squadron, followed by the legalized Space Raiders version.
• Crazy Climber = Crazy Climber did show up "as is" outside US markets, with no apparent attempt to legalize their original version.
• Pac-man = Crazy Gobbler and later also Super Gobbler, as well as Nibblemen. Let's not forget Cat-Trax, Jungler and R2D Tank as being similar or related maze games.
• Galactica = Space Attack. (The arcade game "Galactica" was just a UK-based name for the game known in the US as "Galaxian".)
• Berzerk = Robot Killer at first and later the less-infringing, legalized Escape.

In the latter days of this system, the makers did actually license quite a few of these obscure arcade titles... but I'm getting ahead of myself again.

• Jungler did come out. It was the first game port the company legally licensed, in reaction to Atari's unexpected copyright lawsuits.
• Centipede has not been located yet by modern day collectors in any condition; infringing, legalized or otherwise. "Spiders" may or may not have been based on earlier code that was first written for Centipede?
• Galaga has not been located yet by modern day collectors in any condition.

It is also interesting to note that there were apparently plans later to follow up the Arcadia 2001 with an improved version; again, after about a year.

Go to the top of this page

Go to the top of this page

The fireworks began last November. At that time, Atari sought to have Munchkin yanked from the stores in time for Christmas. Although the injunction wasn't granted at that time, the judge ultimately ruled that the graphic elements used in Munchkin did, indeed, infringe on the Pac-Man visuals.

Odyssey appealed this decision and won a temporary stay which allowed it to keep shipping its own popular gobble game.

As Electronic Games goes to press, there has been yet another important development. Atari has succeeded in getting a judge to vacate the stay, with the result that Munchkin is not being shipped to stores at the present time.

In a related case, On-Line Systems, maker of Jawbreaker for the Atari 400/800, has settled its litigation with Atari. The software publisher is believed to have negotiated a licensing agreement that will allow it to continue to market its much-praised maze chase".

News article reprinted in its entirety. Note that this legal battle had been going on for some time before this report and that Atari was taking legal action against more than one of its videogame market competitors.

"ATARI has fired the opening shots in what promises to be a copyright war with far-reaching implications. Commodore has been the first to feel the effects but other companies, including Bug-Byte, A and F Software and Micropower are also involved. Graham Daubney, Atari's software manager, would not comment on his company's actions but issued the following official statement. "Atari International (UK) Inc is at present campaigning against video games which infringe the Pac-Man copyright. The campaign is being pursued to protect the customer against imitations. "As part of the campaign, Atari is applying for an injunction against Commodore Business Machines (UK) Ltd, Jellymonsters. "Atari allege that Jellymonsters is an infringement of their copyright. Atari are pressing for a full hearing as soon as possible and will claim substantial damages." Atari's campaign is being conducted on two fronts. Both the Commodore and Bug-Byte actions concern Vic-20 cassettes. In each case the companies have been instructed to stop sale of the tapes, to surrender all remaining stocks and promotional material to Atari, to pay Atari all revenue gained through their sale and to allow Atari access their businesss records. Commodore is not prepared to comment on the situation at present. A spokesman for the company would only say: "We are aware of the Atari claim." Bug-Byte, however, has agreed to abide by the first two of Atari's instructions. It has stopped all sale of its Vic-Men program and has surrendered all remaining stocks and promotional material to Atari. "We had the choice of doing what we did or getting involved in a very expensive legal battle that could have cost tens of thousands of pounds," said Bug-Byte's managing director, Tony Baden. "We do not agree that they have got copyright except on the Pac-Man program listing - and all our listings are completely different," he told Popular Computing Weekly. "There is no way that we can afford to stand up against a company the size of Atari, but it obviously needs something like this to go to court to sort out the position. "In the long term I suppose it will be good for the industry. The arcade situation is becoming stale at the moment and it will force companies to think up original games. "Atari's action has not affected us at all. Admittedly Vic-Men was one of our most successfull games but we will survive." In the other series of moves A and F Software and Micropower have received instructions to send copies of certain programs to Atari for inspection. Mike Fitzgerald, managing director of A and F Software explained: "The letter from Atari requested us to send them a copy of our Polecat program for the Acorn Atom to look at and play. If they decided that the program is not an infringement then Atari would send us the recommended retail price of the cassette. "We have no intention of sending them a copy of Polecat. It does not, in our view, infringe the Atari copyright. If Atari wish, they are quite welcome to call and we will demonstrate the program. "Whatever happens, we are not removing our program Polecat from the market and it will need a court order for us to do so. "A and F fully intend to go ahead and develop the Polecat program for any computer we choose. "We believe that the program does not infringe Atari copyright either in machine code or visual image." Micropower has now received three letters similar to that received by A and F, relating not only to alleged infringements of the Pac-Man copyrights but also that of another Atari game, Centipede. Managing director, Bob Simpson, said: "It is unlikely that we shall be supplying copies of any of our games. We have over 150 games on sale and if we start sending out tapes in this way, where will it all end? "There is no doubt, though, that any injunction taken out against us would be quite damaging, bearing in mind that the average life of a computer game is at most three or four months."

Star Raiders, too, maintained its first-place ranking. There are signs of a coming shake-up there, however, Star Raiders, though significantly less magnificent than it was last fall when it began its dominance of the poll, must compete with literally hundreds of new computer programs. It's still number one, but it no longer enjoys a two- or three-to-one superiority over the rest of the games on the list.

The hottest new videogame cartridge appears to be Imagic's Demon Attack. This invasion-type game vaulted into the fourth spot in its very first month of eligibility. Doing nearly as well is Activision's Grand Prix. The steering game with gorgeous graphics popped into the fifth spot.

A couple of relatively new cartridges just missed making the videogame "top 10" this month. Mattel's Star Strike and Atari's Yars Revenge each lacked only a few vote-points of qualifying for the list.

Ms. Pac-Man scored the biggest gain on the coin-op list, leaping into the fourth position. Space Duel, a sort of sequel to Asteroids, looks like it may pick up where the older title left off."

News article reprinted in its entirety. Included here due to the comments regarding the popularity of Pac-Man at the time; it helps overall understanding of the cause-and-effect relationships between individual articles here. Note that this article and the only following it were both printed in a single monthly issue of the magazine.

What happened in between? Atari's copyright lawsuits. Ouch!

Atari's obviously unexpected legal actions had largely been directed at stopping unauthorized clones of various popular arcade games. Which unfortunately for Emerson and the other licensees of this globally-distributed group of consoles, was largely what the makers of this console group had based their marketing efforts on. Double-ouch!

Emerson's own stated plans originally involved them being well on their way towards $15,000,000 in gross sales starting at roughly the time this article would have been submitted. (I am assuming it was submitted in June for publication in September, given an industry-standard publishing delay of three months.) That tends to shed some light on why Emerson got out of the gaming market long before they had originally expected to... share-holders do not like finding out that $15 million in sales might actually end up being no sales at all? That would tend to ruin just about anyone's day! 

Part of this sounds suspiciously like the magazine may have simply been repeating a glorified press release's specs instead of actually seeing this system in action? Signs of further problems brewing.

At the risk of repeating myself, Emerson did not write the games for this system themselves... but we did not always know that. It turns out (after years of painstaking research) that Emerson and others simply licensed someone else's hardware and software. Think about it... to sell licensees on the idea of going into a partnership with them, these parties unknown had to have made promises of being able to make a good profit back on their original investment. And now that seemed very unlikely. "We will make it up to you, we promise" was probably what this company had to tell all of their now-angry licensees. And it looked like the Christmas sales season might come and go, with no profits? No doubt the licensees insisted that the company re-write and legalize all of the infringing games... at the maker's expense, and not out of the licensees' pockets?

I used to think this was an intentionally misleading statement made by an Emerson spokesman. I now believe it could have just as easily simply been Emerson repeating what they had been led to believe?

No more information on this mysterious newer-than-new game system is known by us at this time. However, there is reason to believe that this could have been a statement made in good faith? The Interton-VC4000 had been the Arcadia 2001's immediate ancestor; that much is true. There was seemingly about a one year interval between these systems according to dates found hidden in game ROMs for both systems. So the company that had made them both, could have planned on repeating the process?

Whatever their initial plans were -- where have we heard this before? -- we have not found any evidence that this actually took place. What did take place in 1983 was that "UA Limited" ported three or more of their later, legally licensed arcade games titles to the Atari 2600 machine... in what we can only surmise was in their minds an open admission of defeat?

To make even these existing matters worse, right below the article above was a brief news report that said some other company was calling itself "Arcadia" and making Atari 2600 VCS games on cassette tape to play through what became the Starpath Supercharger. In other words even the console's name was under dispute!

It is important to note they manufactured them AFTER the many lawsuits Atari had begun to file. We have no clear idea why this took place. More details, such as exactly WHEN Atari first licensed the arcade original would help us to figure out if they were taking a big chance, legally speaking, or if they felt the overall risk was low?

See the "ROM date code" list (started in April 2002 by Arcadia researchers) for other manufacturing dates.

As for this actual quote... is it just me or did the reviewer just insult the machine twice in a row? The "wise man" reference may mean that the buyer should beware? The rest sounds vagely like a warning, too... at least to me? If that is what was intended, it probably took place because the magazine was highly suspicious of the things they were being told, and had serious doubts of their own that what they were being told was accurate?

This console group actually had NOTHING like 28k of RAM ... it had one kilobyte, not 28 kilobytes. This means they multiplied their system specs by 2800 per cent; it was an astoundingly dishonest and amazingly desperate thing to do... you are bound to get caught if your lies do not even sound remotely plausible? I am aware that other people repeated this, in good faith, later on... non-technical people that did not know any better. This is not a conjecture; this is cold hard fact, based upon an examination of actual RAM memory chips on real circuit boards from real consoles.

To any sort of a technical expert, this claimed number does not even make any sense. All digital computers and video game systems work on binary principles; everything has to be based on powers of two. A claim of 32k would have made more sense. A claim of 24k is still plausible, but 28k? "Sorry, you're lying, buddy!"

However, note that only two months had passed... if none of them were ready then and six were ready now, that's not really all that bad? The coding rush was on. At that pace, with four actual months till the actual day of Christmas, there was still some hope remaining? It still looks like they won't be able to make it in time -- not fully -- but they might minimize the past damage?

While the sysem itself lacked this feature, some of the later games do cycle or change their colors if you plug them in but you don't play them for awhile. But note that most of the overseas 1983 titles were written after Emerson had abandoned the videogame market.

Perhaps more important is the implied half-admission, obtained under apparent pressure, that Emerson was not actually in charge of making the design decisions involved. To whom within Emerson's own company would this Emerson own spokesperson  have to go to, to in their own words "...look into the situation..."? If Emerson was in charge, they'd just get on the phone and talk to someone. The only way to take this as an honest statement is to remind yourself that Emerson was only a licensee, and that any real or imagined faults of the console really fell under the licensor's jurisdiction and control. Emerson was "out of the loop" and this statement nearly admits that openly.

This legalized clone obviously had a high priority with the console's makers, given that it was one of only six games "ready to go" four months before Christmas.

Remember the openly negative comment above, where he said "...the company is going to have a hard time convincing potential buyers of this"? The reviewer had said that at the end of his hardware review section. He made this additional negative comment at the end of his software review. Sounds to me a lot like "don't believe a word of it, folks, 'cause we certainly don't!"

News article reprinted in its entirety. This trademark dispute implies Emerson was still interested in staying in the gaming market as late as January 1983, which would have likely been the printing deadline for this issue, given a 3-month lead time. But note that under U.S. law if you do not protect a trademark you risk losing it, so the fact that Emerson's lawyers took action in this matter could be considered as just 'Big Company' routine.

Press release reprinted verbatim in its entirety. See also this other report from just seven months earlier which stated just how happy Atari was at their financial fate, etc., etc. Given a normal lead-time of three months, this report would have submitted for publication on or around February 1983; right after the Christmas had ended, with some of Atari's competitors reeling from an unexpectedly bad year's profits. Not being overly sympathetic towards their competitors, Atari apparently figured this was a good time to finish off any that were wounded enough and weak enough not to be able to survive much more of this cutthroat competition? It is not known for certain when Emerson decided to abandon the videogaming market but it was definitely sometime during this year. That leads Ward to believe that this latest wholly-unexpected fiasco didn't make Emerson want to stay around much longer? Other licensees continued longer but close-out sales soon became Emerson's game fate.

Which leads us back to the details of this court case against Imagic, because it apparently affected anyone that had a Phoenix-like game on the market that appeared to have the "boss" stage of the original arcade game. That would have included Emerson and the other licensees, since "Space Vultures" apparently fell into this category at one time... box and label art implies that stage is in the game, but only a legalized version without that important part of the game has been found to date. Ward expects the original version will be found at some point, most likely with that stage intact, just as has been the pattern with the other formerly-infringing games.

News article reprinted verbatim in its entirety. Notice that some competitors were now going after Atari, challenging their right to continue to -- in their opinion's -- bully anyone and everyone into complying with their wishes or being forced out of the market completely. At some point, efforts like this paid off -- judges began to simply not accept any more lawsuit filings from Atari, apparently claiming Atari was clogging the court system with frivilous lawsuits. That aside, it did not do Emerson any good... by then, they were most likely completely out of the game market. Upon seeing this, the remaining overseas licensees probably became a bit more bold in their personal attempts to compete... if so, this would help to explain why games like Crazy Climber came out in its obviously infringing form, with no apparent effort then being made to disguise or "legalize" the game?

well, I was in the area of a fleamarket today and a made a pretty
good find. 3 2600 carts that were not  on DP's list. they are:

UA 1983 pleiades (I guess its like the arcade game)
ua 1983 cat trax (a pacman type game)
funky fish (weird fish game)

funky fish has a title screen that says

funky fish
round 1
lic tehkan
corp 1983
ua ltd.

I opened pleiades and it looks like a handmade proto. JUst thought
I would let people know. I will try to take them to the next BAVE
meeting.. Larry you awake??? Later, Bill"

End of document.
Go to the top of this page