Were the Atari ST's big for gaming or just the 8 bit line?

[kool kitty89]

Going back a previous comment made:

 

I was always under the impression the Spectrum sold well in Spain not the CPC as there are loads of Spanish Speccy games and the upgraded 128k machine was first released in Spain and funded by a Spanish company. The CPC's big market was France where it was produced by Schneider.

Where was the MSX most popular in Europe?

 

The Spectrum was still going into the 90's, with support from people like Ocean, but most of the games being released were 128k only. And for the person who called the Spectrum crap it certaily wasn't. Sales figures don't lie and there were many games that were better on the Speccy than the other 8-bits, anything in 3D for a start where it was much quicker.

You had exceptions to that though like Star Wars and Elite being significantly faster on the Beebe (but slower on the Electron), though I assume you also mean pseudo 3D games and not just the polygon/wireframe games. (not sure about the CPC versions)

 

That makes some good sense due to CPU speed and the fact the speccy has a linear framebuffer (ignoring attributed) rather than characters, though that would also make the A8, Beebe, and CPC more suited to those types of games than the C64, MSX, VIC, or other character/tile only systems. (including consoles) The A8 would be a fair bit slower than the Beebe at software rendering with only ~1.2 MHz affective CPU speed (the video chips eating the rest in DMA while the Beebe has interleaved DMA like the Apple II but 2x as fast) though you could drop to a lower resolution on the A8 to compensate at the expensive of blockier wireframe graphics.

 

Of course the A8 didn't get software support anywhere near the speccy and the Beebe was popular early on (and expensive) but Acorn screwed up with the Electron. (I wonder what might have happened if the Electron was simply a low cost -but fully functional- version of the Micro rather than being significantly more cut down)

 

 

The Spectrum seems to more or less have been the mass market option in Europe for a home computer from its launch up to ~1985 when the C64 really became more attractive with falling prices and the Spectrum was relegated to the budget category while the really low-end Sinclair machines (ie ZX-81) were the budget options back when the Speccy was new in '82/83.

 

A shame they couldn't/didn't push a little more with the 128 rather than just the sound and RAM being expanded. (something to push the graphics into a more competitive range without driving cost up too much would have been really nice -maybe something closer to what the CPC or Sam Coupe could do but at least adding hardware scrolling -so maybe more like what the CoCo III added with a 256x192 16 color mode indexed from 6-bit RGB with hardware scrolling... that could have put it ahead of the C64 in many cases and even the ST for certain games due to the hardware scrolling and would have been close to the ideal mid/low-end game machine in the late 80s and beginning of the 90s in Europe, at least if it was cost competitive with the C64)

The CPC+ range sort of did that too, but was too late and didn't have the userbase to build onto like the Speccy. (plus it did a bit more than the minimum needed while a CoCo III like graphics mode for the Speccy 128 was pretty much ideal for entering in '85/86)

Loki was way more than that minimum of course and post 128k in any case, though given what Flare did after leaving (following the Amstrad buyout) it definitely wasn't vaporware. (they formed Flare technology in 1986 and I believe they completed the chipset in LSI in 1987 before moving on to the Konix and developting the integrated successor with the slipstream ASIC in 1989)

[The_Laird]

The MSX was quite big in the Netherlands I believe.

 

Its still quite amazing to think that the people who designed the Spectrum also designed the Jag.

[svenski]

The MSX was popular in Spain as was the C64 and Amstrad. The Spectrum was the most popular out of the bunch. The Spanish market wasn't as advanced or as competitive as the UK though.

[kool kitty89]

The MSX was quite big in the Netherlands I believe.

 

Its still quite amazing to think that the people who designed the Spectrum also designed the Jag.

The flare guys engineered the original Spectrum??? I thought they were mainly involved with LOKI before leaving SInclair and forming Flare and designing the flare 1 chipset. (forming Flare Technologies in 1986)

 

So it was Flare 1 which was completed in '87/88 and the consolidated revision (also updated with 12-bit RGB) in the slipstream ASIC completed by 1989 for the Multisystem (in both cases very fast blitter with 16 and 256 color modes -256 color being faster- plus fast single cycle 16-bit multiplication coprocessor, 16-bit RISC DSP at 12 MHz intended for both 3D and audio processing, and Z80 or 8088 CPU for game logic/AI and other general purpose stuff). The original Flare team was comprised of Martin Brennan, John Mathieson, and Ben Cheese (the latter being the designer of the DSP), and they stayed together with Flare up to 1989 when the Slipstream was finished and all 3 started doing consult work.

It was at that time that Martin Brennan consulted for Atari on the Panther handling the final LSI chip design of the object processor and subsequently convincing Atari that the Panther was not a good idea for the mass market and that they should push for a new machine and 3D capabilities which became the start of the Flare 2/Jaguar project with the core documentation for the TOM ASIC laid out in 1990 and primarily engineered by Brennan and Mathieson (not sure if Cheese was ever involved) followed by the Jaguar 2 up to the 1996 cancellation.

 

Mathieson would go on to head the Nuon project later on as well.

 

Interestingly, around that same time (or a little later), Argonaut Software contracted Ben Cheese to develop a 3D coprocessor for the SNES which became the MARIO chip (later dubbed Super FX GSU-1) for Star Fox. That makes some sense given Argonaut's interest in the Multisystem's 3D capabilities earlier on and given they were a British company as well. In fact, I suspect the Super FX may use the same DSP core as the Flare 1 and multisystem or a direct derivative thereof -the clock speed of the original super FX also matches the 12 MHz rating of the Flare1/MS DSP. (possibly also integrating the multiplier unit given both that and the DSP were critical components for the Flare 1's 3D capabilities, and the Super FX ASIC obviously added dedicated DRAM interface/control circuitry and interfacing to the SNES's CPU -the earlier Flare 1/MS design would also have been using an 8-bit bus but oriented toward the Z80/x86 architecture -though I think the 650x arch also used little endian byte organization, so that would be common already)

The MARIO Chip's success led to the formation of the spin-off ARC International (Argonaut RISC Core) which has outlived both Atari Corp and Argonaut Software and still exists today.

 

So that would also imply that the Flare 1 chipset or multisystem would have been capable of Super FX quality 3D (and scaling/rotation/texture/raycasting effects) back in 1990 or earlier. (except with some added advantages of a direct bitmap display with a blitter and 256 color framebuffer and slightly higher clock speed -eliminating the overhead of the DSP having to render everything and handle the 3D math and then also convert the completed frame to an SNES compatible planar character cell/tilemap format -using 4 bitplanes for Star Fox 1&2 and Vortex and 8 bitplanes for the others using the rarely used 256 color mode -also limiting screen size and framerate further)

 

One thing I do wonder is why Brennan/Atari didn't consider the Slipstream hardware as an alternative to the Panther for a 1990/1991 console design. Note that Konix couldn't afford an exclusive purchase of the IP, so a simple royalty agreement was established but left Flare with full ownership of the chipset and thus open to licensing it to anyone else. (and they did license it to several set-top boxes later on) Or maybe they did consider it but dropped the idea for whatever reason. (it seems unfortunate in hindsight given the potential of that chipset in a conventional cart based console and Atari's absence on the home console market from 1990-1993 -with the 7800 and 2600 declining steeply though 1990 in the US, not sure about Europe- and the ST never being a huge competitor on the US market while declining in Europe in the early 90s as well, and the more funding issues they had, the worse management problems became -though Sam doesn't seem to have been as generally capable as Jack ever was either, and of course they also lost Michael Katz in 1989)

 

Of course they also missed the opportunity of the Mega Drive due to Jack and Rosen not being able to come to an acceptable agreement (namely that Rosen was presenting only the North American market for Atari to distribute to and Jack wanted to push into European distribution as well -where Atari and Sega both had growing markets), though given the context of the time there were a lot of other factors in 1988 favoring Atari dropping that with their in-house ST based console plans, the fact that they had about double the market share in the US over Sega at the time, etc and not nearly as clear-cut as in hindsight. (notably Katz was heavily in favor of Atari taking Rosen's proposal, but again Tramiel and Rosen couldn't come to a common agreement -and Katz subsequently ended up taking a break from the business but stopped his vacation early to join Sega of America just after the launch of the Genesis -presumably courted by Rosen but I'm not sure- and he did a great job laying the foundation for the system's success in the US market including competitive advertising, celebrity endorsements, and the rather smart deal with EA after they threatened to go unlicensed, turning that into a favorable result for both Sega and EA)

Edited December 1, 2010 by kool kitty89

[carmel_andrews]

if i recall correctly, i think the st series (incl. the ste, falc and tt etc) was more successful (sales wise) then the a8 series (seeming as though the tt/falc were semi st compatible)

[kool kitty89]

if i recall correctly, i think the st series (incl. the ste, falc and tt etc) was more successful (sales wise) then the a8 series (seeming as though the tt/falc were semi st compatible)

I don't think that was ever in question, at least for worldwide sales. For US specific sales I'm not sure though.

[oky2000]

The MSX was popular in Spain as was the C64 and Amstrad. The Spectrum was the most popular out of the bunch. The Spanish market wasn't as advanced or as competitive as the UK though.

Games were half price in some EU countries too.

 

Electron was caught in the home computer slump, not a bad machine....keyboard only bettered by Atari 800 too.

 

BBC only sold to middle class as it had exclusive contract in UK schools til 86ish....overpriced.

[oky2000]

if i recall correctly, i think the st series (incl. the ste, falc and tt etc) was more successful (sales wise) then the a8 series (seeming as though the tt/falc were semi st compatible)

I don't think that was ever in question, at least for worldwide sales. For US specific sales I'm not sure though.

 

Amiga had tough times in USA too until video toaster sealed desktop video market til late 90s. Was ST sold in Japan at all?

[kool kitty89]

The MSX was popular in Spain as was the C64 and Amstrad. The Spectrum was the most popular out of the bunch. The Spanish market wasn't as advanced or as competitive as the UK though.

Games were half price in some EU countries too.

 

Electron was caught in the home computer slump, not a bad machine....keyboard only bettered by Atari 800 too.

 

BBC only sold to middle class as it had exclusive contract in UK schools til 86ish....overpriced.

Except it was considerably weaker in CPU capabilities and sound than the Beebe, though certainly a lot cheaper. (in hindsight, it seems like they may have been better off producing a fully functional -and expandable to 64k- low-cost derivative of the full Micro taking advantage of the consolidation but keeping the full audio and 2 MHz CPU -in RAM-)

 

The graphics weren't that amazing though with the 3-bit RGB limitations, but at least it did offer pure bitmap modes (though only 160 pixels wide for the 8 color mode with 4 or 2 colors for all higher res modes), but avoiding clash at least and with enough CPU grunt for some neat software rendered stuff. (CPC's graphics mode 0 was a lot nicer though, but it was several years newer as well)

And having low res support (and packed pixels even if you wasted the 4th bit) is better than getting stuck with ONLY high resolution graphics and bitplanes like the popular PC8801. (3-bit RGB stuck to 640x200 with 3 bitplanes and 48k dedicated display memory and a 4 MHz Z80 with no hardware acceleration or lower res modes) Though at least that got expanded to 8 indexed colors from 9-bit RGB for all models from 1985 onward. (and added a YM2203 rather than just a beeper for all those models as well -and had 8 MHz Z80 models in '86 and higher end 8MHz V50 based versions that further expanded things but none making it especially more gaming friendly -and the 8 color modes tended to get the most support prior and shift to PC9800 games for higher end -not sure if the V50 based 8801s had any cross compatibility with the 9801s)

 

 

 

if i recall correctly, i think the st series (incl. the ste, falc and tt etc) was more successful (sales wise) then the a8 series (seeming as though the tt/falc were semi st compatible)

I don't think that was ever in question, at least for worldwide sales. For US specific sales I'm not sure though.

 

Amiga had tough times in USA too until video toaster sealed desktop video market til late 90s. Was ST sold in Japan at all?

Yeah, it seems to have fallen behind the PC along with everything else in the late 80s, though in the long run it seem to have sold significantly better than the ST (though there's some conflicting info on that) and by the time it really started to gain stronger sales, it was still falling even further behind PCs as they started getting more and more common faster. (in terms of cost/performance, the A500 was still a better option than DOS machines up into the beginning of the 90s if you could find a local dealer -not just for hardware, but a steady supply of software) Though console gaming was much bigger than computer gaming in the late 80s and early 90s in North America, more like Japan in that sense I believe.

Edited December 3, 2010 by kool kitty89

[oky2000]

How much was the Falcon on launch? There was one with minimum memory and no HD, one with HD and the full whack package.

 

I only ask because by Jan 93 an A1200 Amiga was down to £299 in most places, and an Amstrad PC 386 (SX 16mhz), without CD was about 900 bucks in the UK but with monitor.

 

The problem was total apathy here in the UK from most games software companies with Falcon/A1200+4000 machines. In America there was apathy from software houses even in the late 80s towards Amiga and ST. PC was rammed down our throats and piracy was the reason given for crap coding of games. Lotus II on an A500 is faster and smoother than any similar racing game on A1200!! And Falcon didn't even get that level of half arsed support.

[Zogging Hell]

The real basic Falcon with 1mb of memory and no hard disk or FPU was £399 at its lowest point in the UK. Completely unusable in that state though. The real basic model would have been the 4mb model with 65mb hard disk, which made the price shoot up to about £799. I think probably Amiga 1200 had swapped places in terms of price and specs with that generation, with the Amiga 1200 being the equivalent of the ST and the Falcon being the equivalent of the Amiga 500. I think probably the Jags development probably killed 3rd party interest in the Falcon really, why would you develop for a machine put out on a shoe-string?

 

How much was the Falcon on launch? There was one with minimum memory and no HD, one with HD and the full whack package.

 

I only ask because by Jan 93 an A1200 Amiga was down to £299 in most places, and an Amstrad PC 386 (SX 16mhz), without CD was about 900 bucks in the UK but with monitor.

 

The problem was total apathy here in the UK from most games software companies with Falcon/A1200+4000 machines. In America there was apathy from software houses even in the late 80s towards Amiga and ST. PC was rammed down our throats and piracy was the reason given for crap coding of games. Lotus II on an A500 is faster and smoother than any similar racing game on A1200!! And Falcon didn't even get that level of half arsed support.

[kool kitty89]

The real basic Falcon with 1mb of memory and no hard disk or FPU was £399 at its lowest point in the UK. Completely unusable in that state though. The real basic model would have been the 4mb model with 65mb hard disk, which made the price shoot up to about £799. I think probably Amiga 1200 had swapped places in terms of price and specs with that generation, with the Amiga 1200 being the equivalent of the ST and the Falcon being the equivalent of the Amiga 500. I think probably the Jags development probably killed 3rd party interest in the Falcon really, why would you develop for a machine put out on a shoe-string?

That and Atari themselves pulled out from Falcon support rather quickly in general. Then again, they were pretty screwed all around for funding at that point and the Jag hype helped considerably to bump investor interest and stock prices in '93 (enough to facilitate winning some important litigation), but they also seem to have pulled out Lynx Support around the same time so who knows what they might have managed with the Lynx and ST for '93 onward otherwise. (and another problem was the absence of a new home console prior to the Jag meaning they had almost no presence in the North American mass market from ~1990 on with the 7800 and 2600 dying off, and declining support in Europe as well... the Jag was in a hard place on the market due to that on top of the funding problems -the Panther as it was in '89 wouldn't have been a good choice either though, they needed something else or should have pushed for a much more conservative design between the Panther and Jaguar, let alone the mistakes they made in the computer business that caused things to decline prematurely in that market sector)

 

It's been said before, but it seems like Atari Corp went down hill after Jack left in '89, though they also lost the marketing and entertainment management skills of Michael Katz at the same time (and just before the build up to the Lynx's launch at that...).

 

 

 

 

 

 

But, going back to the technical side of things again, I missed one really obvious thing in the ST's design... the Hitachi "Keyboard Processor" is just a HD6301, a 6800 based microcontroller, so they did indeed already have a dedicated I/O processor and one using a bus type similar to the 6502 with functionality not unlike that of RIOT+6502 (or 6507 for that matter, except that's missing interrupts). It makes me wonder if Atari Corp ever considered using existing Atari Inc custom/licensed support chips/CPUs and already stockpiled off the shelf support chips in place of the ones they did use in the ST.

 

I wonder if the 6301 had enough resource left after managing I/O to also handle any other coprocessing duties, especially driving a DAC, especially if games made specific provisions to utilize I/O in such a manner to minimize 6301 overhead if that was possible. (the keyboard/joyports already used only a low baud rate and the MIDI ports should have been inactive for most/all games)

 

As it is, the 6301 only has a tiny 128 byte scratchpad and hard coded onboard ROM to work with, so if they were going to configure the system as such, they'd need to be able to interface it with main RAM to pull samples from and add a bare DAC to write too.

 

For that matter, the 6301 would have given the AMY chip the MCU intended to drive it as well.

[+DarkLord]

How much was the Falcon on launch? There was one with minimum memory and no HD, one with HD and the full whack package.

 

I only ask because by Jan 93 an A1200 Amiga was down to £299 in most places, and an Amstrad PC 386 (SX 16mhz), without CD was about 900 bucks in the UK but with monitor.

 

The problem was total apathy here in the UK from most games software companies with Falcon/A1200+4000 machines. In America there was apathy from software houses even in the late 80s towards Amiga and ST. PC was rammed down our throats and piracy was the reason given for crap coding of games. Lotus II on an A500 is faster and smoother than any similar racing game on A1200!! And Falcon didn't even get that level of half arsed support.

 

I got my first Atari Falcon 030, 1 meg, no hard drive from Ted Elden at Elden Computers in West Virginia. I had to drive about an hour, hour and a half to get there. It was $799.00. Ted threw in the hard drive upgrade kit, and a RGB video adapter. I believe it was $999.00 for the 4 meg model with an 84 meg internal drive (they had been 65 megs, but Ted told me Atari upgraded them with little to no fanfare).

 

For me, it was (and for that era) still is, worth every single penny I paid out for it.