What was Atari thinking?

[high voltage]

The feeling I had back when all this was going on... the 2600 was WAY old even by 1982. Intellivision and Colecovision were WAY superior. Kids were laughing at Atari by then calling it "Retardi" in my class. But the games kept coming out for it, and the graphics were laughable. It was clear that a game on Colecovision was just amazingly more superior. (Check out Venture for the two systems as a good example.)

 

Actual conversation I had with my brother in the '80s:

 

Me looking through the ColecoVision catalogue: "Hey with this expansion module we can play all the games for Atari."

 

Older Brother: "Atari games suck."

 

Me: "Atari games suck?"

 

Older Brother: "Yeah. ColecoVision games are way better."

 

Me: "Okay."

 

Me again: "Hey, this Tunnels and Trolls game looks really cool."

 

Older Brother: "I don't think that game ever came out."

 

Your brother is weird

[BillyHW]

Analogue controller were around in the 70s for numerous Pong consoles, the first home console to introduce it was the Interton VC 4000 in 1978, followed by Vectrex and 5200.

 

None of these are really anything like the N64 thumbstick.

 

The Vectrex had the 'first' joypad style control, eg control = left hand, fire = right hand. And, the Vectrex had 4 buttons, nothing new there. Atari 5200 had four buttons too.

 

A miniature joystick is not a joypad.

 

First platform game: Space Panic(1980)

 

You can't jump, it's not a platformer.

 

Lightgun, well Magnavox Odyssey (1972), and basically arcades and numerous Pong consoles during the 70s.

 

Okay, but Sega and Atari didn't copy Magnavox with their light guns. They copied Nintendo.

 

Multiplayer racing, many arcade games during the 70s. Pitstop II with split-screen on C64, A8.

 

Multiplayer kart racing is a different genre than simulation racing. Nintendo invented it.

 

3D games: Hunter (Amiga) Alone in the dark (PC), both early 90s.

 

These aren't 3D platformers. It would be fair to say that Bug on Saturn and Jumping Flash on PlayStation were the precursers to the genre-defining Mario 64.

 

But you are right, nobody can hold a candle to Nintendo for .....copying.....

 

The most shameless copiers I'd have to say are Sega.

 

And mocking gaming commercials, check out some cheesy American or Japanese NES adverts. Cringeworthy to the hilt.

 

Too true. I want to start a thread later on video game commercials. Nobody comes out smelling like roses when it comes to commercials. They are all so bad. The first really great video game commercial was for GTA 3 on PS2 I'd say.

 

My point with showing the XEGS commercial was to show that it was trying to compete with the NES.

[jetset]

By abandoning the 5200 so soon, Atari totally blew its reputation. And backwards compatibility was such a bad idea.

 

Agreed. I get so tired of hearing that argument as one of the reasons the 5200 "failed". I have yet to see a valid argument for why the 5200's "failure" had anything to do with it's (initial) lack of compatability with the 2600. ONE person gave me a valid reason, that being his 2600 died right before the 5200 and Coleco's came out. Beyond that I've yet to hear of a valid reason why anyone did or should have cared.

This whole discussion reminds me of what was going on with the 5200's Wikipedia page. Sibling rivalry. This discussion is supposed to be about the 7800 yet all I'm seeing is anti-5200 rhetoric and opinions about how "inferior" it is. Oddly enough in the same breath there's agruments being made of the 7800 being on par and/or superior to the NES. Yeah, right.

[BillyHW]

So the 5200, which was based on the A8, wasn't good enough, so they make the 7800. Then the 7800 is positioned as the low-end toy store console, and the XEGS which is based on the A8, is the "high-end" computer console.

 

Retardi indeed!

[high voltage]

An analogue stick is an analogue stick, of course N64 pad is copied from the 70s principal

 

MSX (1983) had joypads called joycard, but Vectrex still counts in my book. Or Intellivision's controller (late 70s)

 

So in a platform game you have to jump? It is not a requirement you know. Of course Space Panic is a platform game, even the term 'platform and ladders' was coined after that game.

 

Same with multiplayer racing, kart racing? simulation racing? What??? the genre is 'multiplayer racing', invented in the arcades during the 70s

 

Sega are the most shameless copiers? Sega had already arcades during the late 60s, early 70s, Nintendo didn't (they converted a bowling alley into a shooting gallery, that's all)

Edited March 12, 2012 by high voltage

[GroovyBee]

This discussion is supposed to be about the 7800 yet all I'm seeing is anti-5200 rhetoric and opinions about how "inferior" it is. Oddly enough in the same breath there's agruments being made of the 7800 being on par and/or superior to the NES. Yeah, right.

 

Enlighten me as to why you think the 7800 couldn't have competed with the NES.

[high voltage]

And, Nintendo didn't only copy all of the above, they copied....doing arcades (seeing Atari's success), copied Pong consoles (seeing Atari's success), copied doing home consoles (seing Atari's success).

I tell you what Nintendo did well, they did some great toys:

http://blog.beforema...-and-games.html

 

I wonder if Nintendo had the 'first' light rifle, they look awfully simular to the Odyssey's:

http://blog.beforema...-rifles-sp.html

Edited March 12, 2012 by high voltage

[doctorclu]

 

Actual conversation I had with my brother in the '80s:

 

Me looking through the ColecoVision catalogue: "Hey with this expansion module we can play all the games for Atari."

 

Older Brother: "Atari games suck."

 

That was honestly the feeling a lot of people had. WHY would you want to have a Atari module? That would be like having an adaptor to play those simple pong games that came out before the Atari 2600 and be able to play those through the 2600. Atari 2600 had Breakout and various pong games already that were better, why would you want the simpler ones? That is how my friends felt about their Colecovision playing Atari 2600 games.

 

Besides, most people had a 2600 off in the corner collecting dust at that point anyway that had a Colecovision.

 

I almost bought a Colecovision. I was amazed by the graphics and games. Loved what I saw with Venture and Donkey Kong. But at the last minute I was swayed after I saw a friend and his Atari 800 and all the games that he had on floppies that he could copy off for me. So I got away from console gaming in 1983 and didn't return till 1999 when I bought the Jaguar, Lynx, and restarted my Atari collecting,

[high voltage]

But true, the VCS add-on was a selling point. I even had the add-on, the Wheel, and the whole Adam set-up, collecting Coleco, VCS and Adam softs. It was a must.

Edited March 12, 2012 by high voltage

[jetset]

This discussion is supposed to be about the 7800 yet all I'm seeing is anti-5200 rhetoric and opinions about how "inferior" it is. Oddly enough in the same breath there's agruments being made of the 7800 being on par and/or superior to the NES. Yeah, right.

Enlighten me as to why you think the 7800 couldn't have competed with the NES.

 

Hmmm...I'll answer that with a question. Why didn't it?

We're not talking the difference of a few units...the NES sold in the neighborhood of 40 million, the 7800 sold what, 2, 3 million? I'm sure graphic wise now with homebrewers that there are comparable 7800 titles. Could the 7800 handle the depth of a game like Super Mario? Zelda? Maybe with tweaking it could, but nothing from the original lineup even comes remotely close.

I'm not by any means saying the 7800 is bad...it's a great system, but it's not on par with the NES. Sorry.

[GroovyBee]

We're not talking the difference of a few units...the NES sold in the neighborhood of 40 million, the 7800 sold what, 2, 3 million? I'm sure graphic wise now with homebrewers that there are comparable 7800 titles. Could the 7800 handle the depth of a game like Super Mario? Zelda? Maybe with tweaking it could, but nothing from the original lineup even comes remotely close.

I'm not by any means saying the 7800 is bad...it's a great system, but it's not on par with the NES. Sorry.

 

Ah! Sorry! I meant compete at a technical level not at a consumer units shipped level. To be honest, there aren't any games from the 7800 back catalogue that impress me (with my programmer hat on). Its main problem was that programmers never really got another shot at the console after their first game (or they weren't good programmers in the first place). Whilst on the NES companies got better and better at making the games as they pushed the system further and further with each round of titles that came out (plus adding extra on cart mappers helped some games out). That sort of development cycle never really happened on the 7800 so its full potential was never reached during its consumer lifetime.

 

The 7800 could easily do games that had some depth (that just means bigger ROMs to me ). Its just a shame that it was stuck with mainly arcade games.

[DracIsBack]

OMG, you were the kid in the XEGS commercial, weren't you Retro?!

 

You're not just saying that because he kicked your ass on the "Nintendo is innovative" claim are you?

[DracIsBack]

Hmmm...I'll answer that with a question. Why didn't it?

 

Complicated question. Here's a few reasons:

 

- Nintendo published substantially better games than Atari did

- Nintendo games had bigger development budgets than Tramiel was willing to pay. Tramiel oftened hired the cheapest developers possible and gave them pitances to work with.

- Nintendo invested in larger cartridges with additional hardware to make the games better. The Tramiels discouraged developers from using additional RAM memory, POKEY chips and larger carts

- The XEGS effort distracted from the 7800

- Nintendo locked in almost all 3rd parties to the NES. Atari released the same titles on all their systems (ie. This version of DARK CHAMBERS is for 2600 and 7800; This one is just for 7800)

- Nintendo had terrific 1st party titles (as did Sega). Atari's current games were Atari Games' brand and not available

- Nintendo bullied stores that carried competitors

- Nintendo advertised a lot. Atari advertised little outside of retail

- Nintendo developers made 3, 4, 6, 7 generations of NES games. Most 7800 developers jumped ship after one, not getting to know the system.

[high voltage]

So the 5200, which was based on the A8, wasn't good enough, so they make the 7800. Then the 7800 is positioned as the low-end toy store console, and the XEGS which is based on the A8, is the "high-end" computer console.

 

Retardi indeed!

 

Quite the opposite, you gotta do, try out, not sit on the same console like Nintendo did with the NES (oh we let it run for 10 years or more....) and see what happened they missed the 16bit entry point and lost.

[Retro Rogue]

Analogue controller were around in the 70s for numerous Pong consoles, the first home console to introduce it was the Interton VC 4000 in 1978, followed by Vectrex and 5200. The Vectrex had the 'first' joypad style control, eg control = left hand, fire = right hand. And, the Vectrex had 4 buttons, nothing new there. Atari 5200 had four buttons too.

 

Yes, and specific to stick analog controllers, they typically work by the use of two potentiometers (pots) whose resistances represent changes in x/y direction. Which is true of the Interton's, Vectrex's, 5200's, 80's Kraft and similar style computer sticks, the plethora of early 90's PC game controllers, and the later N64/Playstation/Dreamcast/Xbox model controllers. In fact, the Vectrex was the first to use minitiarized pots and connectors to provide an analog stick in a thumb factor (though still just long enough that it could also be controlled by the thumb/forefinger if desired).

 

Multiplayer racing, many arcade games during the 70s. Pitstop II with split-screen on C64, A8.

 

The first multiplayer (more than two) racing video arcade game I'm aware of is Atari/Kee's gigantic Indy 800 game from 1975, an 8 player racing game (and yes it was in color as well) -

 

 

 

 

If you even want to go with the "Kart" genre (defined by the idea of go-kart style racing where cars smashing in to each other are part of the game play) there was Taito's 2 player Crashing Race from 1976.

[BillyHW]

Real innovators ship.

[high voltage]

Don't even go there, the things Nintendo promised and didn't deliver....miles long...Oh sorry, Nintendo never innovated.

[Austin]

Real innovators ship.

 

Give it up already.

[DracIsBack]

Don't even go there, the things Nintendo promised and didn't deliver....miles long

 

 

Star Fox 2, Super NES CD, American NES keyboard, Wii DVD player upgrade ...

[BillyHW]

OMG, you were the kid in the XEGS commercial, weren't you Retro?!

 

You're not just saying that because he kicked your ass on the "Nintendo is innovative" claim are you?

 

Actually, I didn't want this thread to get too derailed. Unlike some people, I'm capable of letting things go. I'm not really sure what I can say to talk reason into someone who thinks that Atari Karts was just the natural extension of Indy 800 and Crashing Race, and not a total (inferior, on superior hardware) ripoff of Mario Kart. I also realize that this is an Atari forum, and that it's probably just best to let the Atari people have the last word. Hey, I love my Atari Lynx, and I've put in more Jag time than most of the people here. Atari was probably the best innovator in the industry, up until the early 80s, when the baton shifted to Nintendo and others.

 

Now, I hope you guys can let the thread get back on topic. I like for someone to explain to me which system was superior, the 7800 or the XEGS. Everybody says that the 5200, which was based on the A8 was hopelessly flawed to compete in the post-crash market against the likes of the NES/Famicom, necessitating the design and release of the allegedly superior 7800. But then the XEGS, also based on the A8, was released as the "high end" system. I'm confused by this.

[high voltage]

Don't be confused, only remember that Nintendo begged Atari to distribute the NES in USA but Atari declined. If that've happened we'd be singing praises about the NES to no end.

 

And... We're not as fan boyish than, let's say the NES forum, but only more factual.... That's all!

[high voltage]

OMG, you were the kid in the XEGS commercial, weren't you Retro?!

 

You're not just saying that because he kicked your ass on the "Nintendo is innovative" claim are you?

 

Actually, I didn't want this thread to get too derailed. Unlike some people, I'm capable of letting things go. I'm not really sure what I can say to talk reason into someone who thinks that Atari Karts was just the natural extension of Indy 800 and Crashing Race, and not a total (inferior, on superior hardware) ripoff of Mario Kart. I also realize that this is an Atari forum, and that it's probably just best to let the Atari people have the last word. Hey, I love my Atari Lynx, and I've put in more Jag time than most of the people here. Atari was probably the best innovator in the industry, up until the early 80s, when the baton shifted to Nintendo and others.

 

Now, I hope you guys can let the thread get back on topic. I like for someone to explain to me which system was superior, the 7800 or the XEGS. Everybody says that the 5200, which was based on the A8 was hopelessly flawed to compete in the post-crash market against the likes of the NES/Famicom, necessitating the design and release of the allegedly superior 7800. But then the XEGS, also based on the A8, was released as the "high end" system. I'm confused by this.

 

One thing baffles me though: ' capable of letting things go'... Anyone but you, I' d say.

 

And yes, Mario Kart is the natural evolvement of 70s arcade racers...that's all

 

 

Edited March 14, 2012 by high voltage

[high voltage]

See, great here eh, Billy, what you learn from us.

 

Basically Nintendo is lucky that it is not controlled by the 'suits' like Atari is since 1976. You only had a real Atari for four years basically.

 

LOL, you mean the one that was almost constantly bankrupt? Honestly, without the "suits" you simply wouldn't have had the golden years of the Atari brand that most of the public is familiar with ('77-'84).

 

And Nintendo was controlled by one main "suit", Yamauchi.

 

 

Oh I also forgot, Nintendo was almost bankrupt in during the pre Donkey Kong years.

 

Talking about keyboards earlier, of course the Famicom had a add-on keyboard, Basic on tape and a add-on cassette player, hmm I wonder if that was such a good idea!

[DracIsBack]

Now, I hope you guys can let the thread get back on topic. I like for someone to explain to me which system was superior, the 7800 or the XEGS.

 

It's a pointless discussion because virtually no systems are 100% superior over other systems when in the same generation.

 

For example, find me an NES game that can replicate the 128 colour onscreen rainbow effect shown in the Atari 2600 version of California Games. :-)

 

The 7800 had newer graphics hardware (MARIA 1984) than the XEGS (GTIA 1981) which give it substantially better sprite capabilities and the ability to more easily put coloursat higher resolutions on the screen than the XEGS. You see it in games like DARK CHAMBERS (on the XE, the sprites flicker, on the 7800 they don't) and COMMANDO (the 7800 version is more colorful than the XE version ... though both are good). The XE does do some things differently than the 7800 which also gives it some advantages, but the 7800 has the benefit of being newer and more capable of what was being played at the time. The player/missile graphics are much more limited than MARIAs sprite pushing power.

 

the XE has better sound out of the box, the 7800 was built to include sound chips in the carts (even though Tramiel didn't use often). The one case where this was shown was Commando. On the XE, it uses the built in POKEY for music and sound. On the 7800, it uses the cart POKEY for music (richer than the XE) and TIA for the sound effects.

 

The 5200 wasn't killed in response to the NES. It was killed in 1984 before the NES was on the market.

 

The XEGS was branded as "high end" because it was also a 'computer' that wasn't just 'limited to games'. They weren't really focusing on its 'higher end graphics', but the fact that it could do more and expand more than a console.

[DracIsBack]

Don't be confused, only remember that Nintendo begged Atari to distribute the NES in USA but Atari declined.

 

That depends on the source you follow.

 

If you read David Scheff's "GAME OVER", the claim is that Nintendo was never serious about the negotations.

 

If you listen to the 7800 25th anniversary MP3, the claim is that Atari was going to keep the NES tied up.

 

There are also articles that Atari wanted retaliation over seeing DONKEY KONG on Colecovision.

 

If you read other articles about the negotiations, they fell apart before a conclusion was reached (business negotiations take a long long time) because people from Atari kept getting replaced, the negotiations fell apart and Nintendo walked.

 

 

The point is, there are many stories out there. I don't know what's true or part of the truth. I do know it's likely not as simple as "Nintendo went to Atari and Atari said 'no'". That's likely a journalistic urban myth. having been in contractual negotiations where clauses are argued over ad nauseum, I can see how the last one would lead to a failed agreement.