I don't even see any problems…..I'm super excited to get my MMRLE! I trust Rick will do everything necessary!

this has always been scheduled for Q2. standard is Q4.

You mean CC remake. CCC is for the original.

Ah. I must have misread that. SWEEEEEET

Your correct. I got over excited with my C's

chris

One thing that has set your project apart from past failures Rick is your openness with sharing information with the general public. If you take your pipeline of future info underground it may have more negative impacts than the perceived positives of not being called out when stuff doesn't look completely perfect. I say stick it out here and keep posting vids and pics, you may end up with a better product in the end. And that should be everyone's goal.

Frankly I wish I understood more about how this board emulation stuff works. I know you said there needed to be software updates to handle the LED lighting change which makes sense, I am honestly curious why the coils and related mechanisms would function differently at all since they should just be running the original code? Again, sincerely not stirring up trouble but just wondering why there needs to be tweaking to begin with?

The original software was meant to interface with original hardware. When you emulate the original software, it's looking for original hardware which doesn't exist. Changes need to be made, or something needs to convert those old signals to work with the new electronics. This is not as easy as it sounds as the original boardset was imperfect and in order to make the MM feel original, you have to "break" new technology perfectly to make it feel perfect.

The minor LED and castle issue seem to be some sort of timing issue. They all technically work, and at the right time, but whatever is taking the old timing of those outputs and converting them to work with the new electronics isn't doing it quite right.

maybe someone more technical can explain better, but they'll get it.

An emulator is a software program that recreates all the functionality of hardware chips. At the very basic core of the game's (original MM) CPU is a processor (a ~3mhz 6809) that reads data from addresses representing switch inputs, and writes data to addresses representing coils and lamps, along with the sound and video. That's all it does, is read and write data based on the instructions found in the MM binary program.

Additional chips, namely the WPC ASIC, also perform reads and writes, and are designed specifically to control a pinball machine. It has core logic for reading the switches and operating the hardware, writing display data, etc.

Recreating this in software (can be) easy with enough knowledge of the original hardware. All the functionality of that chip is known, so a person can write a software program that creates memory pools that represent the actual memory on the MM game, and that will read binary code (MM in this example) and read/write to those pools exactly as the original CPU would do as it executes instructions in that code. Another section of the emulator program later looks at those output memory pools, and renders audible and visual output based on what it finds there. This is what you see, hear and feel.

Obviously, we're adding quite a bit of extra work with this translation process, but that's OK because the computer that's emulating the older hardware is generally magnitudes faster. It can spend 1000 cycles mimicking one cycle of the original. The problem becomes timing. In this case, the original MM CPU pulls the towers down, then duty-cycles the coils (turns them on and off very rapidly) so it can hold the towers down without the coils melting. On the original game, this duty cycle is generated at a low-level, likely in the ASIC hardware. When the emulator is running the MM code, it may not be able to observe the state changes of the coil in the emulated program, and translate that to state changes in a real coil, fast enough for the original 'hold-down' effect to happen.

To fix, he can throw faster hardware at it (run the emulator program on a faster board so it's easier to capture critical timing), or tweak the emulator itself to be faster, or "cheat" and program additional layers on the emulator that will look for duty-cycle 'type' behavior from the original program, and instead of attempting to emulate it natively, substitute it's own pre-programmed duty-cycle sequence instead.

Remember, the hypervisor (emulator program) controls the hardware on these new MMs, not the original code. It runs the original code in a sandbox, feeds it appropriate switch information, and operates the pinball hardware based on what it sees the MM code outputting in its sandbox. There will ALWAYS be latency in this process. The emulator "works" if the latency doesn't affect the output. With a lamp, there's wiggle room. When turning a coil on and off 200 times a second, there's much less room for error.

I do have one question... there is an 'old-fashioned' long horizontal IC on the one main MMR board. I can't imagine it's an actual 6809 or 6821 PIA... (NLA) .. anyone have any idea what that IC might be? If it *is* a 6809 this might be much lower-level emulation than I originally thought.

Fear monger are out in this thread.

Peoples freaking out over a work in progress video is crazy. (especially after the WOZ debacle/delays)

BoP 2.0 has an issue just like this, The helmet lights are all kinds of wonky when playing the emulated original s/w. Hopefully they can make that work, but I think in that case most people will be playing 2.0 so its not so much of an issue.

You had me at hypervisor.......

Listen, when you ask people to lay out money for deposits and then have issues with the following discussion then don't ask for the deposits. It's just that simple. If the demand is so strong it seems like the best way of doing business. The other guy that tried this isn't having great success either. Build your product and put it on the market. This whole give me money and then we'll design a game and Pinball company is completely distorted. Quit trying to mitigate the risk of building a machine by asking for the deposits and just go build the product and let us know when it's done.

I believe this machine was already built when announced for deposit, was waiting on Roger Sharp's & Williams approval. So in all fairness he did announce when they had the prototype built. Now it was a matter of about how many we'll make and tweaking the products bug findings.

why are you still commenting? you got your refund. bug off.

Troll, your post was so helpful.

The Prototype was used to get cash infusion plain and simple. As we've seen building a one off isn't an issue. Build 1000, ask the other guy how that's going?

Like so?

xtc-geordi-laforge-real.jpg

I do have to ask.. for the people who aren't invested in the project, why does it matter to you how the game is made?

I will say, at least there's progress finally being made on these vs. the previous company's attempt

+1.
In the immortal words of Nancy Kerrigan "whyyyyyyy"?

Oh Pinside

I know the concept is hard for you guys to understand, it's OK.

Actually, you are the troll. The FULLY REFUNDABLE $1K was just to try and have some kind of seriousness to the process. It's a new company, remakes have never been made, it's a process and it has a learning curve.

Can't we wait for the guy to fail first before we crucify him? He's done nothing so far but keep his promises. He promised approval this year, and they were ready, it was Roger who needed to wait an entire whole week! (sarcasm).

PPS thought it would take months to sell out, again, this has never been done before. They didn't want to take 3,000 pre orders and have 2,900 people drop out after they shell out god knows how much in time and materials. In hind site, that would not have happened, but how did he know? The $1K was just encouraging serious buyers.

Rick is Obviously doing everything just right!

Because if you had read Ricks comments you would realize that he is not only going to make these machines for those that are invested, he will continue to make them for those that wish to purchase one later. Those people that might want to buy one later also care how the game is made.

They can't wait until it is to run their mouths about it?

Ding Ding Ding Ding!
For the record still waiting for the requested refund. Must be hard to work through all the requests.

I'm interested in the electronics from an engineering standpoint. It's seriously like porn to me.

*looks around* - you do realize you are on a pinball discussion forum... where... you know... topics about pinball are discussed?

Are we supposed to lock all threads to 'owners only' now?

and btw.. I am in for MMR LE

There's a difference between discussion and just being an asshole.

You know, I'm not talking about you personally, but there has been a fair amount of this going on *in both directions* on this project. And yes, I'm talking about the pre-order/blind supporters of this project.

The fact is you can roll back to the early 6 or 7 pages of comments on this project and you will see many multiples of supporters assuring all of us that this emulation boardset issue was a non-issue, the game would run with original code, on much new (and better) hardware. Now it has been revealed there is more to it than that and it will create issues, a lesser person than I might say "Told you so!" at this juncture. But nothing positive will come of that, and Rick has been kind enough to discuss the situation with me offline.

Fact is for all intensive purposes this game will be a wholly new creation at least electronically speaking. That is kind of a big deal and would speak to whom is doing this coding and tweaking. Because it obviously matters if you guys want the game to play as an original. As an owner of an original game I am willing to concede that Rick's game could eventually play better than an original WMS game. I'm just curious how all of this is going to sort itself out by the first week of January, in time for Roger's inspection...

Wow, must be very serious purposes!!

Eight million to be exact.

Yep, I should point out my comment was more directed at those who are spewing fire and what not. Discussion is great! hating for the sake of "disturbing the poop", not so much.

I thought the video I watched was the one they were putting into production because the Williams inspection is so close, I figured how will they fix that castle destruction issue in that short period of time. I didn't realize it was a work in progress and Rick has every intention to fix the castle sequence (I hope). Therefore I apologize for my frantic behaviour and please keep the tidbits coming.

Maybe they won't. For Williams to sign off, it only needs to look and play like the original. I'm not sure the castle destruction sequence would matter in that regards. It is whatever Williams considers "look and play".

Some do seem to exist to just derail.. or think the forum is their personal playground... but that's a problem on pinside in general. But in the context of the question I responded to - the answer is MMR is a subject for the entire pinball community as its another manufacturer setting up... it's bigger than the peeps looking to buy the title.

I just think we're very lucky to have Rick post here and answer our questions. It doesn't happen with too many other companies....

Agreed, regardless of the industry!

At least he's not doing it on Facebook, and editing out subjective comments.

Lead balloon. Overhead.

The emulation board set IS a non issue, it will be emulating original code. The game looks and plays fine, they need to clean up the castle destruction sequence and fix a timing issue with the LEDs, but there will be no issues.

It will not be a perfect game when it ships. The masses will find issues, PPS will fix them, we'll plug in our USB sticks, it's not a big deal.

Hopefully the issues will be very very minor, especially compared to the video.

The quote on the PPS website says the game is being fine tuned. The castle destruction sequence works, the LEDs work, they just need to be fine tuned like the page says. It's a non issue.

Anybody that owns an original MM or any of the reproduction candidates should also be very pleased with this project, whether they are buying one or not, because previously hard to find parts should now become readily available.

On pinside?

I do find it comical that folks are complaining about this and/or comparing it to JJPs ponzi-finance-program.

It's not like they are asking for full payment before the design is even shown....

If anything, the nominal deposit simply acts as a bullshit-test to separate the tire kickers and those really ready to buy one. I'd love to see JJP use THIS model for TH and JJP3 and beyond....

Hopefully the conversation doesn't digress completely. I for one (though not an investor) am very interested in following the project. It's a title I'd love to own.

Maybe it just semantics, but not sure I would say 'non issue', it is an issue, and I am sure it is on the 'issue list' they are working through. Having said that, I think all of these 'issues' are items that can certainly be resolved with a reasonable effort, and are not things to get worked up over, at least not at this point in time.

As others have said, other issues will pop up, but suspect 99% of them can be resolved with software tweaks. I can say from experience that it took several iterations for me to get the 'pulsing patterns' right on coils in my game to get it to do things 'just right' (and not blow fuses and burn coils), something similar to getting the castle to behave correctly.

Does not appear that any of the 'issues' that have been identified from the short video would be the types of thing that will be major roadblocks to manufacturing getting started early next year, since they all seem to be software related.

If I get my game on time, and as promised, it's a non issue. Of course there are issues during the build and design process.

If the game comes to me with those problems, it's an issue. If the game comes any later than October, it's an issue. Until then its just not, just normal things that pop up during the build and design phase.

I think we are in violent agreement.

Damn you and your violence!

Violence solves nothing. But I think they just bought a pair of dueling pistols at that Vegas pawn shop on TV.

trolls belong under the playfield.
all the fun is above

All these worries are based on one released video of a "prototype " playing. I'm sure Rick will release another video at a later date to show that these bugs have been addressed. There will probably also be a video released showing Roger Sharpe with a big smile on his face and big thumbs up and a congratulating handshake with Rick and the approval of the MMR.
Then the others that are on the fence will put their money down and order a standard MMR.

I am still 100% in on this but Rick, if you're out there, maybe posting a quick note about the known bugs/defects that are being worked on will give people reassurance and avoid having to call the MMr Emotional Support hotline (your cell).

It's kind of curious all the concern that people have about this project. Yes I truly understand how people were burned by another person in the past with the promise of a new MM but I'd hope people keep things in prospective. Rick has been very transparent and gone way above to keep us in the loop about what is happening. He also has been running a very successful business PRIOR to even taking up this project. He's not going to jeopardize this business by bringing an inferior product to market, which could happen if MMR wasn't up to the of the highest standards.

So if you are in to order you have two things working in your favor

1. Rick isn't going to do something to jeopardize his existing business
2. Roger isn't going to sign off unless the end product is high quality

Factor that all in and I think you have a good basis for a high quality product. I wish him and ANY pinball manufacturer the best of luck regardless of the nameplate on the machine. MORE IS BETTER FOR ALL OF US!

Just one man's opinion.....