Talk:ColecoVision

Specs
Added some information to the Specs about the sound chip used in the Colecovision

Roller Controller
There was also a fairly high quality trackball expansion called the 'Roller Controller', which came with Slither and also worked with War Games. I think it is noteable because as a piece of consumer video game console hardware, a trackball has never been attempted again to my knowledge. (Unsigned comment by 24.5.124.49)
 * I doubt it could be made into a full wikipedia article, if you think it can be, then go for it. It's probably a better idea to mention it on this article though. I've seen that controller, almost bought one off ebay, but I got the steering wheel instead. --Phroziac (talk) 18:19, 22 July 2005 (UTC)


 * The roller controller was neither an expansion (it plugged into the joyports, not the expansion bay) nor unique (there were trackball controllers released for the Atari 2600 and Atari 5200, at the least). Its existence ought to be added to the main ColecoVision article, though, along with note of the Super Action Controllers also available at the time, as they "complete" the standard Coleco Industries accessory set for the console. -db
 * I believe the confusion comes from the driving controller, which is called "Expansion module #2", even though it also connects to the joystick ports. --Phroziac (talk) 18:46, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Super Action Controller
Also not mentioned is the Super Action Controller, the grip held controller with buttons for each finger, a joystick, keypad, and paddle style rolling dial. Intended to be used with their more advanced sports games (baseball, boxing).


 * It would be nice to find a picture of one. They were nothing at all like boxing gloves- and nothing at all like any other game controller available on any other game console before or since. (The closest would be the Milton Bradley MBX with one trigger, three thumb buttons and a 2-axis plus rotate analog stick on top. http://www.mainbyte.com/ti99/hardware/mbx/mbx.html) I've seen ONE and I wish I had bought it but I didn't have a ColecoVision. IIRC, the pistol grip had four different colored trigger buttons, there was a sideways spin wheel on top with the 8-way joystick mounted near the front and the keypad between the stick and wheel. The design was ambidextrous so that either hand could be used on the grip with the other hand operating the stick and keypad. In contrast, most one button joysticks had the button at the upper left corner- making them difficult to operate using the left hand on the stick.  Here's a page with some images. http://www.vintagecomputing.com/index.php/archives/188 http://kotaku.com/gaming/colecovision/the-worlds-most-convoluted-controller-198449.php

Generation
I find it fascinating that the first sentence of this article identifies the console as "third-generation", right next to the Major Consoles template, which places it clearly in the second generation. Is there some extra generation, omitted by the template, but taken into account here? Does "third-generation" have an entirely different meaning in this context? If the latter is the case perhaps a different term should be used instead. - Kfroog 03:18, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

I wish I knew about that plug in that allowed users to play 2600 games 25 years ago. I would've asked for one of those instead. JesseG 04:07, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

When it came out, it was described as third generation. I'm a little surprised that it is matter-of-factly called second generation in the article with no reference to how it was actually described at the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.230.42 (talk) 20:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

In my view, the ColecoVision and Atari 5200 belong in the 3rd generation section, as technically they are almost as advanced than the NES. I think the reason for ths split is that North Americans like to class consoles as before and after the Video Games Crash of 1983 - something that means absolutrely nothing to people here in Europe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.197.36 (talk) 12:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

The famicom/nes is more advanced with more colours, multicoloured sprites. However, the colecovision has the exact same specifications and capability as the Sega SG-1000 which is classified as third generation. When the colecovision came out in 1982, with it's higher resolution, it clearly relegated the Atari 2600 and Intellivision to budget systems. AtariVCS/Intellivision, and then Atari5200/ColecoVision/SG1000/Vectrex, and then Famicom/SMS are three distinct generations. It's just that the middle generation of the 1980's had a very short life and is forgotten.76.67.43.101 (talk) 15:21, 27 May 2018 (UTC)


 * The ColecoVision definitely should be moved to Third Generation along with the 5200 and Vectrex since those were all in competition with each other. There was considerable if not universal consensus that ColecoVision in particular had launched the Third Generation.
 * https://i357.photobucket.com/albums/oo12/Alison123456789/Third%20Gen/Gamermagazine1983_zpsfbc8c06c.jpg
 * https://i357.photobucket.com/albums/oo12/Alison123456789/Third%20Gen/TVGamer1983_zps1b9e74ad.jpg
 * https://i357.photobucket.com/albums/oo12/Alison123456789/Third%20Gen/VideoGamesmagazineJan1983_zps6c3c77eb.jpg
 * https://i357.photobucket.com/albums/oo12/Alison123456789/Third%20Gen/Colecothirdgen_zps6cfdc993.jpg
 * https://i357.photobucket.com/albums/oo12/Alison123456789/Third%20Gen/TelespieleReport84CBSColeco_zpsdc2e4001.jpg
 * https://i357.photobucket.com/albums/oo12/Alison123456789/Third%20Gen/videogamesplayerfall82_zps24b6db23.jpg
 * https://imgur.com/a/E86Lh (Atari 5200 and ColecoVision described as "third wave")
 * Wikipedia currently isn't even consistent with itself. The ColecoVision and SG-1000 are for all intents and purposes the same machine released 11 months of each other yet the SG-1000 is in the Third Generation. The 5200's placement is also logically inconsistent since it's effectively Atari's Wii U. Everyone is in agreement that the Wii U was "next gen" to the Wii and the Switch was a mid-cycle replacement. Nobody disputes this. We don't retroactively group the Wii U with it's predecessor because it flopped. So why are we doing it to the 5200? The discrepancy of all this is irreconcilable. Bumping the ColecoVision, 5200, and Vectrex to Third Generation cures every problem. 47.16.172.103 (talk) 21:50, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Name
Shouldn't this article be named ColecoVision rather than Colecovision? They tended to either capitalize the whole word or to make the C and V a bit bigger than the other letters. Also, all of the sources I used for Donkey Kong (arcade game) give the name as ColecoVision. — Amcaja 17:00, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * You are correct. The category for colecovision games is "ColecoVision" This page shoudl be made a redirect to ColecoVision. --Larsinio 17:19, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I moved the article accordingly. Thanks! — Amcaja 18:46, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Speaking of the name, This guy makes a compelling case that the name of the console is actually "Vision" or "Coleco Vision," with a space. I vote we rename the page to "Coleco Vision." Or, at the very least, create a redirect from "Coleco Vision" (which currently goes to nothing).--Yeechang Lee 18:17, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * That's weird that the redirect wasn't created automatically when I moved the page. Oh well; no worries; it's there now. As for that guy's claim, I still disagree. The words are all bunched up, and the company's own documentation seems to support "ColecoVision". I think it was supposed to be a play on the word "television", much as "Intellivision" was. — Amcaja 18:52, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * If you peruse the documentation accompanying anything sold for the system, at the time the console was referred to by Coleco Industries Inc. as either the "COLECOVISION&trade;", or when not all-caps "ColecoVision&trade;". One could probably make an exhaustive search of the literature, but I would hazard that instances where the words appear to be broken apart result from design aesthetics and not much else. D.brodale 20:41, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * A quick search of the US Patent and Trademark database reveals that Coleco filed both "COLECO VISION" and "COLECOVISION" word marks as well as graphical versions of both spellings. The two word version appears to have been filed about year before the single word version. Both word marks have since been renewed by the Coleco Holdings group. Since Coleco has apparently never filed for a "VISION" word mark it seems highly unlikely that the proper name of the console is Vision. Xot (talk) 08:55, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Retail price
How much did the system cost at launch? How did game prices compare with competing systems? --Navstar 15:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Original MSRP was $174.99, if I'm not mistaken. Atari 2600 was around $99.99 retail by '82. Not sure about Mattel's Intellivision. StagParty 20:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Oddly, Consumer Reports tagged the pricing at ~$200 (I would guess $199.99) in its November 1982 write-up of the console, though. D.brodale 20:36, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

CBS photo
Anyone find it a bit odd that the photo associated with this article is that of the CBS model (and inserted CBS Ladybug cartridge) sold in the European/Australian markets, and not that sold in the US market, which is the primary focus of the article itself? D.brodale 20:35, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Did ColecoVision Really Sell 6 Million Units?
I think it did not and that this number, which appears on both the referenced website and several other websites floating around out there, is an error created through a mistaken extrapolation from sales of a particular game.

In 1982, the first year the ColecoVision was one the market, the company shipped 550,000 systems. This number is supported by an article in the Toronto Globe and Mail on January 5, 1983, called "Market Perspective" which contains the line "In 1982, [Coleco] said it built and shipped about 550,000 Colecovision video games and more than eight million software cartridges for its system and those of others." A February 16, 1983, article in the same newspaper states that "Coleco expects to ship 550,000 Colecovision consoles [in the first quarter of 1983], as many as it shipped all of last year. Coleco has already shipped 250,000 this quarter."

A New York Times article dated August 1st, 1983 entitled "Coleco Strong in Marketing" details how many units ColecoVision moved in the first half of 1983 and overall with the line "Since its introduction last fall, Colecovision has sold about 1.4 million units, according to the Video Marketing Game Letter, an industry newsletter. Of that total, about 900,000 were sold this year, compared with 800,000 units by Atari and 300,000 by Mattel."

ColecoVision news tapers off after that point unfortunately because the Adam Computer and Cabbage Patch Kids draw all the headlines, but an April 18, 1984, article in the Wall Street Journal regarding Coleco's first quarter performance in 1984 states that "Adam and ColecoVision accounted for about 50% of first-quarter sales, but ColecoVision sales were below those of the year-ago quarter, when more than 500,000 units were shipped." A July 20, 1984, Wall Street Journal article reports that "Coleco said sales of electronic products [in the second quarter of 1984] were "significantly lower than those for the second quarter and first half of 1983," when Colecovision games and video game cartridges were still quite strong." A January 4, 1985 Wall Street Journal article confirms that sales of ColecoVision were essentially dead by that ponit as "James Chanos, an analyst for Deutsche Bank Capital who also has a short recommendation on Coleco, says the company faces an additional $100 million electronics write-down. The second write-down would be for inventory and receivables associated with Coleco's slow-selling ColecoVision video-game system and for additional Adam assets."

What this means is that we know by the middle of 1983 the company sold 1.4 million systems. Sales for the rest of the year are not indicated, but in the first half of 1984 they could not have sold more than an additional 900,000 and probably sold significantly less. After that, sales were negligible. Even if the company had sold 900,000 systems in the first half of 1984, the company would have had to sell 3.7 million systems in the second half of 1983 to reach that six million figure, and it is more likely the company would have needed to sell four million or more. Even if Coleco had found a way to quadruple production of the system in the second half of 1983, they would still not have managed to move that many units. The six million figure, therefore, appears unsubstantiated.

Where does that figure come from then? I believe it results from sales of Donkey Kong, which sold six million units according to several sources including this quote in the book Game Over on page 121: "...[MCA] received from Coleco an agreement that they would pay [MCA] three percent of the net sales price [of all the Donkey Kong cartridges Coleco sold]. It turned out to be an impressive number of cartridges, 6 million, which translated into $4.6 million." Because Donkey Kong was bundled with the ColecoVision console, presumably certain people extrapolated that six million in Donkey Kong sales equaled six million in ColecoVision sales. Coleco released Donkey Kong for the VCS and Intellivision as well, however, so that six million figure does not represent ColecoVision sales alone.

I believe I have shown that the cited source on this page is not reliable for the total number of ColecoVision units sold over its lifetime, but I would be interested in hearing other opinions or seeing other sources presented. If none are forthcoming in the near future, I am gonig to remove the six million figure from the page. Indrian (talk) 17:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, doing further research we know they were up to 1.9 million units before Christmas of 1983 (a year and 4 months from the release, which is pretty quick).  And 1984 was also the year when they did the Cabbage Patch/Colecovision crossover during the height of the Cabbage Path craze (when there were waiting lists, long lines, sellouts and fights, etc.), where anyone who bought a Colecovision before Nov. 14th would get a free Cabbage Patch doll.  There's also this article that shows them still being manufactured in early 1985, and this article from mid '85 stating Colecovisions were still being sold, and this article that states Coleco was still selling inventory through late 1985.  So at this point, I could see maybe 3 to 3.5 million units being generous. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 21:58, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah that makes sense to me too. I meant to say above that sales were negligible after 1984 as opposed to after the first half of the year, because as you point out they had the whole Cabbage Patch deal going on.  I don't think the 1985 numbers probably had much of an impact.  Question is, what do we do with the page now?  The six million figure obviously has to go, but what goes in its place?  I guess at this point the only solid figure we have is the 1.9 million, so the article can just state that figure, go on to say that sales fell off with the crash, picked up again slightly with the Cabbage Patch deal offer in 1984, though still down from the early 1983 peak, and then fell to almost nothing in 1985.  Let me know what you think. Indrian (talk) 22:35, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, we have to be precise. So if the end of '83 figures is all we can concretely nail down right now, then we have to change the figure to that but note it being Dec. 1983.  We also have other things that need to be changed now as well (which is why its good you broached this subject), such as the discontinuation year (which currently incorrectly states '84 when we now know its at least through '85). --Marty Goldberg (talk) 23:26, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I am not sure I made myself clear. In the infobox, yes, we need to be precise and do as you suggest.  In the article itself I think we can give some of the information I indicated above, all of which we have sources for. Indrian (talk) 14:03, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm curious to know if the units sold figures discussed and cited above include sales of the ColecoVision by CBS Electronics in the UK, Europe and Australia. Thoughts? Ikrananka (talk) 21:27, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * While we don’t have any specific figures for countries outside North America, sales in those regions were negligible. There is only one pre-Internet source that ties Coleco and six million together, and that is ‘’Game Over’’ discussing ‘’Donkey Kong’’ sales, which was not exclusive to ColecoVision. Indrian (talk) 23:45, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Also, more sources emerge over time. In April 1984, the Boston Globe reported that Arnold Greenberg said Coleco had "sold 2 million ColecoVision games since its introduction in 1982."  The system was on the market only one more year after that, and all reports were that sales collapsed during that time period.  Once again, there is no way the system got anywhere near 6 million; it probably failed to crack 3 million. Indrian (talk) 03:33, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Could you provide some reference to backup your assertion that sales outside of North America were negligible. You've rapped another person on the knuckles for not providing references but have done just that here with what appears to be a rather dismissive statement.  I find it extremely hard to believe that sales outside NA were "negligible" as the ColecoVision was heavily marketed by CBS Electronics with bespoke versions of the ColecoVision created and sold in the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Denmark, Australia and even Argentina.  I recall it being available in every major electronics retailer in the UK when I purchased mine.  While it came to market in Europe and Australia 11 months later than NA it was still on-sale for a good 12+ months during which time sales would hardly have been "negligible".  By way of an example, and this is not meant to be a reference for an official sales figure, but an Italian member of AtariAge states that "a former CBS Italy manager told me, it was 1994, that Colecovision sold 260,000 consoles in Italy".  Rather than "negligible", my belief is that total sales across these regions would have been at least 1 million if not more.Ikrananka (talk) 13:56, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Seems like you are the one needing to provide sources. Every ColecoVision sold overseas was made by Coleco, CBS just distributed.  That 2 million sold figure is everything Coleco sold worldwide.  In 1984, the Yankees Group estimated that Coleco had sold 1.6 million ColecoVision consoles in the US through the end of 1983.  That leaves around half a million for the rest of the world.  That’s 25% of the company’s sales, so not negligible in that context, but negligible in the context of trying to count up to six million. Indrian (talk) 15:15, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry if I offended, that was not my intent. And don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those trying to say that sales were 6 million as, like you, I have seen nothing to even remotely back that up.  I was just trying to say that sales outside of NA would have been much more than negligible which you have now agreed is the case.  BTW - do you have a link to that 1984 Yankee Group report, I'm just really interested to read this kind of stuff.Ikrananka (talk) 15:38, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Total sales
What were the ColecoVision's total sales, 6 million? There is no refrence on the page. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 10:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Did you not read the long thread right above this? Total sales are not known, but we have proven the six million figure found on some websites is not accurate. Indrian (talk) 19:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

There are definitive sources for worldwide sales of the ColecoVision in 1982 (560,000 ) and 1983 (1.5 million ), these being the Coleco Industries, Inc.'s annual and quarterly reports.

Specific units sold figures are not given in the 1984 and 1985 annual reports, however figures are given for the nominal value of ColecoVision inventories and accounts receivable for those years along with figures for their Consumer Electronics division and the ColecoVision's qualitative effect on those figures.

For 1984, Consumer Electronics total sales was $98.5 million, compared to $403.9 million in 1983. On page 22 of the 1984 annual report where it is directly comparing 1984 to 1983, it states that "The decline in sales of Consumer Electronics was primarily due to reduced sales of ColecoVision products. The increase in shipments of the ADAM Family Computer System in 1984 was largely offset by provisions for price reductions and returns recorded in the last half of the year." So the bulk of the $98.5 million in sales for 1984 can be attributed to sales of the ColecoVision, it's accessories and games cartridges.

Also, on page 3 of the 1984 report it states that by the end of 1984 the "total of ColecoVision inventory and accounts receivable was $40.5 million." and that during 1985 "the balance of ColecoVision inventory (will be) sold." It is also important to note that the Accounts Receivable takes into account price reductions introduced to help shift inventory.

For 1985, Consumer Electronics total sales was $56.2 million consisting "principally of the ADAM Family Computer and ColecoVision video game systems, accessories and software" (page 25).

As can be seen, sales of the ColecoVision through 1984 and 1985 must have been modest compared to 1983 but also must have been in the hundreds of thousands for the sales and inventory figures to be in the many tens of millions. Unit sales per million dollars would also have been higher than in 1983 due to unit price reductions introduced through 1984 and 1985, contributing further to the number of units sold estimate.

Therefore, while definitive figures for ColecoVision units sold is not available for 1984 and 1985 it is perfectly reasonable, based on the financial sales data given above from unimpeachable references, to conclude that sales of the ColecoVision were "well in excess of 2 million".Ikrananka (talk) 19:19, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Certainly reasonable if writing your own journal article or monograph, but the very definition of original research by Wikipedia policy. You have no idea how much of that money was made in software sales rather than hardware and accessories, nor even how much of that revenue was generated by ColecoVision products generally rather than Adam and third-party publishing on other consoles.  Therefore, we cannot accurately extract unit sales for the console from available data. I personally find something like 2.5 million to be a believable number, but absent further sources, we cannot just assume sales were "well in excess" of 2 million for the purposes of the encyclopedia. Indrian (talk) 19:27, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Fair enough and understood. I too believe that around 2.5 million is a believable number hence why I was trying to justify that "well in excess of 2 million" was okay to use.  However, I understand from what you've said that this is "original research" as defined by Wikipedia and therefore not acceptable to state.  Perhaps one day more definitive data will become available.  Someone please interview Arnold Greenberg and ask him!!!!  Ikrananka (talk) 22:02, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

BIOS Delay ByPass
The article states, with regard to some companies bypassing the startup screen delay, "which necessitated embedding portions of the BIOS outside the delay loop, further reducing storage available to actual game programming."

Is there some evidence this is actually what they did? We know today that the only difference between having the startup screen and not is the order of the two header bytes (don't we? ;) ) It doesn't bank out the console ROM, is there some other reason they would need to do that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.185.88.246 (talk) 18:41, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Earlier than 1982
ColecoVision came out in the later '70's. I was a kid living in San Jose CA at the time. We moved to PA in 1980, and I had already been playing it for a few years. It did come with Donkey Kong, and the only other game I remember having we Ladybug. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.145.62.36 (talk) 23:58, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * That is incorrect and contradicted by every reliable source in existence. Now Coleco made video games in the seventies, but these were dedicated consoles in the Telstar line that played Pong and Squash, and some target shooting games.  They also released the Telstar Arcade in 1977, which was a non-programmable, cartridge-based system that played several ball-and-paddle, driving, and shooting games.  If you are truly remembering a Coleco console you played in the seventies, it has to be one of these. Indrian (talk) 00:21, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Unsourced Material
Article has been tagged for needing sources since 2007. Feel free to reincorporate the below material with appropriate references. Doniago (talk) 13:59, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I have restored the Technical specifications to the main article adding in a reference to the ColecoVision Technical Manual. This technical manual contains all of the technical specifications that are listed. I did delete the reference to the Zilog Z80A being by NEC, as Coleco sourced their Z80A chips from a number of different manufacturers and not just NEC. Ikrananka (talk) 00:23, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Nintendo Entertainment System
Added from an actual interview with multiple sources about how the CV was the inspiration and the reason for the current design of the Famicom and NES: "== Nintendo Entertainment System == The Nintendo Entertainment Systems current design and technology is owned to the Colecovision. Which along with the Atari 7800 brought back a dead industry after the video game crash of 1983. The two are very similar in power and the NES would not have a noticeable upper hand until 1987 when chips were used to enhance visuals in more games. other systems inspired by Colecovision include MSX, Sega SG-1000, Sega Master System among others with similar design and specs.

According to an interview with Japanese Investment firm magazine Nikkei Electronics. Which then is translated. Before work on the famicom began, Coleo employees visited japan to show off the Colecovision prototype. This apparently shocked the them with the high-tech visuals and technical features Coleco had at the time. Takao Sawano, a member of the development team, brought a full version home to let family play it and were equally as impressed. Takao Sawano, joined Uemera, the head of Famicom hardware, and started designing the hardware based on the specification of the Colecovision.

Uemura stated that it was the ColecoVision that technologically spurred him and the ColecoVision he had in mind when considering the image of the product. There is also a Rumor that Nintendo asked to distribute the CV and Coleco refused, resulting in them makig the NES out of spite, however, the interview proves that the Colecovision was very important to several developers world wide. " — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakandsig (talk • contribs) 20:30, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * A couple of points here. First, the "sources" you provided are not in proper citation form, making them impossible for anyone else to check.  You do not need to provide sources that are freely available on line, but you need to at least give publication information and reproduce relevant quotes from the articles so we know where you are coming from.


 * Second, you have taken some basic facts that are accurate and then drawn conclusions that are at best original research and at worst unsupported by any evidence. It is true that Uemura and Sawano wanted to create a system with similar capabilities to the ColecoVision, which Nintendo was interested in licensing for a Japanese release.  There are sources that back up this point, including the Nikkei Electronics article, which you tried and failed to source to on the page and which I have also read a translation of.  The hardware was not, however, based on the "specification" of the ColecoVision, which was a Z80-based machine.  The Famicom was 6502 based with a custom graphics chip that was more capable than the TI chip in the ColecoVision.  To say that the "specifications" are generally the same or that the "design and technology" are "owed" to ColecoVision goes far beyond any claim in the Niekki Electronics article and therefore constitutes original research.


 * Third, wikipedia is not in the habit of presenting rumors as fact unless it is a pervasive rumor backed by many reliable sources. You have provided none in this case.  This is also a rumor that is unfounded.  There is an interview with a member of the Coleco team that negotiated with Nintendo and he states that the two companies could not come to terms because Nintendo wanted too high a royalty.  The failure to license the ColecoVision was probably a factor in Nintendo deciding to create its own system, but there is no evidence of "spite" or "revenge."


 * So in conclusion, it would be okay to discuss the ColecoVision as an inspiration for the design of the Famicom and it would be okay to discuss Nintendo's attempt to license that system before deciding to create its own system, but your edit makes too many exceptional and unsupported claims to stand in its original form. Indrian (talk) 01:06, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Nintendo entertainment system
The last time I has some words that were put added to make original research, instead I have fixed the issues and quoted the source directly: ""== Nintendo Entertainment System == The Nintendo Entertainment Systems current design and technology is owned to the Colecovision. Which along with the Atari 7800 brought back a dead industry after the video game crash of 1983. The two are very similar in power and the NES would not have a noticeable upper hand until 1987 when chips were used to enhance visuals in more games along with bankswitching.

According to an interview with Japanese Investment firm magazine Nikkei Electronics. Which then is translated. Before work on the famicom began, Coleo employees visited japan to show off the Colecovision prototype. This apparently shocked the them with the high-tech visuals and technical features Coleco had at the time. Takao Sawano, a member of the development team, brought a full version home to let family play it and were equally as impressed. Takao Sawano, joined Uemera, the head of Famicom hardware, and started designing the hardware based on the specification of the Colecovision.

Uemura stated that it was the ColecoVision that technologically spurred him and the ColecoVision he had in mind when considering the image of the product.


 * As you can see these statements are backed by official sources from an interview involving Nintendo as taken straight out the source with no additional wording. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakandsig (talk • contribs) 01:16, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Read the topic I helpfully started above this one while you were blocked. To summarize, you took some true statements and drew wholly unsupported conclusions. Indrian (talk) 01:39, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You have proven time and time again to have a deep seated bias agains any change and to ignore whole post. The very first sentence in this section is "The last time I has some words that were put added to make original research, instead I have fixed the issues and quoted the source directly" and you literally responded with the same statement. This whole thing here is literally taken out of the document, try reading before replying thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakandsig (talk • contribs) 01:44, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I will admit that dealing with some of the poor edits you have made has left me a little too revert happy, so I apologize for that. Your claims of bias are pretty laughable personal attacks that you need to halt though.  Anyway, I rewrote your addition a bit, and I feel it now reflects the article without making unsupportable claims. Indrian (talk) 01:59, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * And I rewrote your rewrite, keeping the actual details from the article, and only rewording the few words that were actually unsupported. Now the text is all from the book as well as a reference to a slight simularity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakandsig (talk • contribs) 02:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Commercial Failure
Given the low sales, and short 3 year lifespan, why does this article not point to it being a commercial failure? Its sales are less than either Atari's or Mattel's, so it needs to be noted that it failed in the marketplace.2602:304:CFD3:2EE0:85B:D26F:C6EA:5E23 (talk) 10:14, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, that is a pretty simplistic view of the situation. The ColecoVision was highly successful on its release in late 1982, outselling both the 5200 and the Intellivision.  Then the entire industry collapsed, which was not Coleco's fault.  It still sold around 3 million even so, which was a great total for the period in question.  You cannot compare the lifetime sales of a system that came out in 1982 with sales of systems that came out in 1977 and 1979 (and it actually sold about as many units as the Intellivision in much less time). Indrian (talk) 14:09, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, the ColecoVision IS a commercial failure. Now that the 14 million hardware and 100+ million software selling Wii U is counted as a "commercial failure" despite grossing approximately $10 billion- BILLION, then ColecoVision is certainly a horrible commercial failure!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CFD3:2EE0:2915:E8BF:7084:D453 (talk) 23:33, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

File:ColecoVision-wController-L.jpg to appear as POTD soon
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:ColecoVision-wController-L.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on September 2, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-09-02. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:15, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on ColecoVision. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131017072158/http://classicgaming.gamespy.com/View.php?view=ConsoleMuseum.Detail&id=24&game=8 to http://classicgaming.gamespy.com/View.php?view=ConsoleMuseum.Detail&id=24&game=8
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111001232609/http://classicgaming.gamespy.com/View.php?view=ConsoleMuseum.Detail&id=24 to http://classicgaming.gamespy.com/View.php?view=ConsoleMuseum.Detail&id=24

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Other game system games
Quote : "I'm pretty sure that the ColecoVision also played Mattel Intelivision games. Since my ColecoVision is stored away with all of its games, I'd have to unpack it to be sure."

Actually the ColecoVision cannot play Intellivision cartridges. It is believed by the ColecoVision fan community that Coleco did produce a prototype Intellivision module for the ColecoVision. However, no pictures or other confirmation that it exists has appeared to date. Ikrananka (talk) 15:12, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Also, ColecoVision was a durable system. Just before storing it away around 2001, I played a few game cartridges and everything worked perfectly. 2600:8800:785:1300:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 10:39, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

"Expansion Modules and accessories"
There's one that's not listed nor mentioned. I don't remember what it was called, but it was like a 'balancing board' controller that you stood on for games like skiing and other foot/balancing games. I'm also not sure that it was made by Coleco or another company - - - but it was compatible.

I know it exists/existed because I have it packed/stored away with my ColecoVision system. 2600:8800:785:1300:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 10:47, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

I think you'll find that "balancing board" is for another gaming system. There was never such a balancing board produced, either commercially or as a prototype, by anyone for the ColecoVision and there are no games that support one. Would be better if you got this out of storage and checked. Ikrananka (talk) 15:12, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

screen size
what is the actual screen size in pixels? its nowhere to be found afaik85.149.83.125 (talk) 12:22, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

The ColecoVision uses the TMS9928A (NTSC) and TMS9929A (PAL/SECAM) video display processors. These output a screen resolution (in graphics mode) of 256 x 192 pixels.Ikrananka (talk) 12:54, 8 October 2020 (UTC)