atarian63 Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 Atari computers were always more stylish, that's all you need. Why do i find the phrase "style over content" springing to mind...? =-) Actually Content and style! Those C64's were Ugggg leeee! i'm sorry, you seem to be offering subjective opinions that are outside the bounds of this discussion. Have a nice day. Talking about yourself? Significantly higher numbers of the "ugggg leeee" machines were sold so either people really didn't give a crap how a machine looked (and lets face it, only a mother could love the 400) or, if how a machine was styled was important, they must have disagreed strongly with both of you since the "stylish" Ataris were out-sold rather heavily. Have a nicer day. i already was, ta. Not in my area of the country And it's still doesn't change the fact that the c64 is uggg leeee! Your argument is without merit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atarian63 Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 I've also stated I have no brand loyalty. guess thats why you go into personal attacks when I dont share the views of some atari "wingnuts". I have no problem conceding that Commodore did a better job of marketing and supporting their products during those times. sure you have no problem. thats the only reason why they sold stuff better than atari, not because they had better machines, right? And strictly speaking, the Amiga was mostly developed before Commodore bought it. depends on how you define mostly. if you mean the main design of the HW I agree, but certainly many times the work went into it in its c= era, than before. ECS, AGA, OS, etc. Uhh, then go somewhere else and play with the commode a dore people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 Significantly higher numbers of the "ugggg leeee" machines were sold so either people really didn't give a crap how a machine looked (and lets face it, only a mother could love the 400) or, if how a machine was styled was important, they must have disagreed strongly with both of you since the "stylish" Ataris were out-sold rather heavily. Not in my area of the country And of course, your area of the country (i'm guessing it's not the same as my country at this point) is all but insignificant in the overall scheme of things; the number of C64s sold worldwide doesn't magically go down just because you didn't see it happen personally. You think the C64 is ugly, i disagree and think the 400 looks far worse but it's all subjective and irrelevant to this discussion anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oswald Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 Hardly... The Atari's not only looked better but had much better keyboards. Just a fact. sure, they even made coffee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazyace Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 hot coffee! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heaven/TQA Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 ehm... can we agree on the fact that Atari's sprite hardware is weaker than the c64 one??? Guys... have you ever coded a game with extensive usage of sprites? what about animation? you have to adjust the pointer to new data plus copy the data most of the frames not mentioning to clear the old one (except using "black dummy bytes"). on c64 I simply inc the sprite adress #id? 1 inc? What when randomly removing sprites? oh...and did you count that each sprite occupies 128/256 bytes? (ok...if not using all of that you can put code there...) ah...and if you want to colour "2600" like the sprites of course the DLI or a kernel needs to be used... As more as I am coding games as more I am gonna use the PMs as what MK and others have suggested...as 2nd "graphics layer" and not for objects... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heaven/TQA Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 another small sidenote regarding sprites... resolution x-axis = 256 positions while c64 320x... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oswald Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 [quote name='Heaven/TQA' date='Thu Nov 27, 2008 10:30 AM' post='1628238 As more as I am coding games as more I am gonna use the PMs as what MK and others have suggested...as 2nd "graphics layer" and not for objects... if I were into games on atary I'd rather live with 5 colors, and use pmgs for bullets. tho bullets can be made of chars just as easily as on c64.. well then 2nd gfx layer btw random tought, why storing the gfx under sprites, wouldnt be rebuilding the covered gfx from the level data easyer ? bitmap mode seems to be more effective on all levels than using chars and then plotting sprites into them. random thought #2, why no demos with using the / line scroll ability, why no vertical stretchers etc etc when its so easy ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oswald Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 another small sidenote regarding sprites... resolution x-axis = 256 positions while c64 320x... the extra bit tho is a pain in the ass to calculate, as all 8 most significant bits are collected into one reg some c64 games simply use 256 positions to make things simpler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 ah...and if you want to colour "2600" like the sprites of course the DLI or a kernel needs to be used... Actually, i tried something like this a few months ago... is it just me or is there not enough time on a single scanline to split all four colour registers if you're using wsync...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fröhn Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 (edited) another small sidenote regarding sprites... resolution x-axis = 256 positions while c64 320x... 367 visible ones actually, or 449 if you open the sideborder. Btw, not all of the 256 PM positions are visible too. Edited November 27, 2008 by Fröhn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison DeMeyer Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 Significantly higher numbers of the "ugggg leeee" machines were sold so either people really didn't give a crap how a machine looked (and lets face it, only a mother could love the 400) or, if how a machine was styled was important, they must have disagreed strongly with both of you since the "stylish" Ataris were out-sold rather heavily. Not in my area of the country And of course, your area of the country (i'm guessing it's not the same as my country at this point) is all but insignificant in the overall scheme of things; the number of C64s sold worldwide doesn't magically go down just because you didn't see it happen personally. You think the C64 is ugly, i disagree and think the 400 looks far worse but it's all subjective and irrelevant to this discussion anyway. Coronation Street is the most popular and most watched soap in the UK, that does NOT make it any good. See the comparison? One more thing, TMR boy, MY posts are never irrelevant, the Atari 8-bit computer is still the most stylish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oswald Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 the Atari 8-bit computer is still the most stylish. which one? each one of them ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetboot Jack Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 Fact is I like my A8 - and nothing anyone says or demonstrates will change that, however loud they shout or however many statistics they shove under my nose. My affection for my first computer is not something I am able to surrender to logic, or facts - it just is! Sure back in the day I wish the A8 had more hardware sprites, but luckily games shoved software sprites around too, I wish it had more colors per scanline, but I was thankful it had a real pallette of colors. I appreciated SID, but I also liked Pokey So the fact there are C64 owners who feel the same about their machine as I do mine is wonderful - everyone has a first love and that's okay! I envied some C64 games like Impossible Mission or Last Ninja that I just did not get as an A8 owner - I wish I had them (later I tried to make 'em)... I am glad some A8 games are subjectively better than C64 versions (the Lucasarts intial quartet for instance), I know there are game my A8 will never beable to do that the C64 found easy (like Mayhem or Armalyte). I am happy there are new games (Yoomp, Space Harrier) that show the A8 had LOTS of untapped potential, the same as I am happy 'cos G2F is around and people are creating great, colorful pixel artwork for the A8 that rivals the best other 8bit's could do. So I am a happy A8 owner and content it is NOT a C64, but I appreciate those who are happy C64 owners too... sTeVE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sauron Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 Excellent post, Jetboot Jack. I agree with your sentiments completely. The A8 was my first computer as well, and although I know in some ways other 8bit machines were better, that does nothing to take away my past or current enjoyment from my A8 computers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison DeMeyer Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 the Atari 8-bit computer is still the most stylish. which one? each one of them ? Yes, you got a problem with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oswald Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 Fact is I like my A8 - and nothing anyone says or demonstrates will change that, however loud they shout or however many statistics they shove under my nose. My affection for my first computer is not something I am able to surrender to logic, or facts - it just is! nobody wants to change your or anyone's atari affection. I havent seen such a post here. did you? its about the performance of the 2 machines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oswald Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 the Atari 8-bit computer is still the most stylish. which one? each one of them ? Yes, you got a problem with that? apparently you got a problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison DeMeyer Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 the Atari 8-bit computer is still the most stylish. which one? each one of them ? Yes, you got a problem with that? apparently you got a problem I don't have a problem with the Atari 8-bit computer being the most stylish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 Coronation Street is the most popular and most watched soap in the UK, that does NOT make it any good. See the comparison? Your analogy is severely flawed because none of those viewers are making a financial investment based on which show they prefer; people made their choice and paid hard-earned cash for C64s and Ataris, so if you and atarian are right and the looks were even one of the important factors, there wouldn't have been more C64s sold than Ataris. That simply didn't happen so either you're wrong about which machine is the more stylish or nobody gave a crap how they looked and worried about what they actually did. Oh, and you're wrong about the most watched UK soap by the way... One more thing, TMR boy, MY posts are never irrelevant, the Atari 8-bit computer is still the most stylish. You can say it all you like but it doesn't get any more relevant to this thread or less subjective. And with three distinct designs and the 400 urinating in the pool somewhat, that statement is also flawed. Not massively impressed by the condescending "boy" bit either to be honest, you'll have to try a bit harder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 Can't we all just agree to pick on the Apple II? (or maybe the Spectrum for you cross-the-ponders). Atari and Commodore owners really are in an elite club of 8-bits with completely proprietary VLSI's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMR Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 Can't we all just agree to pick on the Apple II? (or maybe the Spectrum for you cross-the-ponders). i like them all myself, i've recently started looking at the BBC Micro as well to see if i can do something fun with that... Atari and Commodore owners really are in an elite club of 8-bits with completely proprietary VLSI's. S'probably what starts all the fights. =-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alison DeMeyer Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 Oh, and you're wrong about the most watched UK soap by the way... Yeah, I thought YOU might like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heaven/TQA Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 (edited) random thought #2, why no demos with using the / line scroll ability, why no vertical stretchers etc etc when its so easy ? because it is so simple: f.e. the top #3 (intro and 3rd screen after the snow pic) http://atari.fandal.cz/detail.php?files_id=3708 http://atari.fandal.cz/detail.php?files_id=453 of course Overmind (first Atari Trackmo #1) http://atari.fandal.cz/detail.php?files_id=3633 http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=zZDwRAnVmPc (2:35) and my lame "distorter" done 100 years ago... the distorting is done via HSCROL. shit... I removed all borders... of course look at other classics: Hobby Tronic Demos: http://atari.fandal.cz/detail.php?files_id=3570 and the Visdom 2 demo... (btw...can someone upload the exe?) and my rubber pic (the manga one in 256 APAC mode) http://atari.fandal.cz/detail.php?files_id=224 Edited November 27, 2008 by Heaven/TQA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetboot Jack Posted November 27, 2008 Share Posted November 27, 2008 Oswald, But that IS the point - there is NO better/more powerful comparison to be made - they are different. It's all about personal preference, there is no impirical way of stating one is more powerful or better than the other. It is not possible to compare byte by byte or chip by chip - it's all relative sTeVE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts