Asteroids: why 8Kb and then such a bad port?

[Nukey Shay]

How many Asteroids-type games were there on the 2600 at the time?

There ya go. This wasn't a bad port at the time. If you wanted the arcade experience, you had to go there.

 

Examining the complaints:

"the harlequin-coloured asteroids stink"

Point taken...however, you could toggle off the color if you wanted to Being solid is a bit of a departure, but I'd imagine that they felt the resolution wasn't good enough to use hollow ones. However, this could have been a "throwback" of sorts if it was originally conceived to use standard collision-detection for the missiles - in which case, hollow asteroids would prove to be a problem. Of course, the game seperates asteroids and missiles on seperate frames in the final product...so solid shapes is less of a necessity.

 

the way they move only vertically at game start is disappointing

Technical limitation. As mentioned above, the two groups cannot move independantly...and they are not allowed to move at different speeds within a group.

 

the game action only vaguely recalls that of the arcade

True of most home ports of the day.

 

the game is definitely on the easy side (and when it gets hard it's not for the right reason)

Related to the above problems. However, the game offers higher difficulty levels to choose from to help overcome this limitation.

 

the idea to put the saucers into a "variant" is as bad as it can be

Completely disagree. More games should offer such variations...so the player can pick and choose what he wants. You might have had a point if the saucers were not in the game at all.

 

That said, these are limits we may accept had it been stored in a standard 4K cart

Um...right. And nobody complains about Pac-Man (lol).

 

But they programmed it into one of the first 8K carts released, didn't they? How did they manage to make such a poor game with 8Kb?

It was THE first. As it might have been able to fit it in 4k if they had take more time optimizing the code. Time vs. money. 8k or miss the schedule.

 

Were programmers forced to use it mainly to override hardware limitations (I'm thinking to the great number of big objects floating on screen, which is unusual for the 2600 architecture)?

Nope. The number of onscreen objects has little to do with the rom size (since this cart does not utilize added RAM in the cartridge).

 

look at what they did with Ms. Pac-Man, that's a great port and it's no wonder it took 8Kb

Ms.Pac-Man may have also fit in 4k had more time been spent on it. There's a lot of bloat in the code (such as using independant movement routines for the fruit and monsters, and blank sections for sprites). After tinkering around with Ebivision's Pac-Man program (which uses a multisprite kernel like Ms. Pac-Man does), I approximate that I managed to cut that program down from 4k to 3k (1k is plenty of space for 3 additional mazes and a moving target). Once again, time vs. money.

[DEBRO]

Hi there,

 

Hi there,

I played the Asteroids Deluxe game on the FlashBack 2, if they had released that back in the day I would have forgiven all sins that the first title made. Asteroids Deluxe is fantastic!

Flashback 2 or Flashback 2+ ?

 

Hmmm I have both machines, is Deluxe different on them? Or is it just more stable on the 2+? I have kept that unit in storage "for a rainy day".

 

Oops...I forgot the final didn't make it into the FB2+ and I'm not sure if any version did...sorry

[ComputerSpaceFan]

Oops...I forgot the final didn't make it into the FB2+ and I'm not sure if any version did...sorry

 

No worries. It still allows us to advertise just how awesome Asteroids Deluxe on the FlashBack 2 really is and that is a good thing (as Martha Stewart would say)

[+SpiceWare]

Point taken...however, you could toggle off the color if you wanted to

 

I just tried it and the TV Type has no effect.

[ZylonBane]

This was one of the first arcade ports, and was very early in the atari lifetime.

 

Um, no. The Atari 2600's library was packed with arcade ports from the beginning. Combat, Air-Sea Battle, Dodge 'Em, Breakout, Circus Atari, Outlaw, Night Driver, Sky Diver... all based on arcade games.

 

As for "highinfidelity" (hyuck hyuck), it's clear he's completely clueless about the technological limitations of the 2600. Furthermore, he seems to think that just because a game diverges from its arcade inspiration in any way, that makes it automatically bad. He probably has no idea that Yars' Revenge started life as a Star Castle port. By his way of thinking, that makes Yars' Revenge the worst game ever, or as he would say, "as bad as it can be".

[highinfidelity]

Right there your argument loses merit. When someone claims a difference of opinion is because of "closed eyes," I get the impression they are not interested in debate, they're just interested in screaming, "You're WRONG!" That may not be what you intended, but it's still the impression you make.

I suppose you didn't notice that I am Italian, so I write here in a language that is foreign to me. I hope you will then understand that I'm not always as good as Shakespeare in fine-tuning my expressions. Sorry.

 

"Let's look at it with open eyes" only meant in my mind that the goal of the topic was to technically analyse a game which is objectively poor in comparison to the huge amount of memory it fills, without being blinded by how many times I have played it as a child in endless afternoons, or by I remember when poor grandpa gave it to me for christmas, or by I first saw it at Scooter's and it's the game that started my videogame mania, and so on. I also tend to give more credit than they deserve to games I have owned as a child, even thlough I can also separate nice memories frome technical merits. However, I reckon that I failed by reading the replies: many posts are indeed about childhood memories, the exact opposite of the spirit I intended to give to the topic.

 

Apologies to whoever may have felt offended by my limited lexicon.

Edited June 14, 2012 by highinfidelity

[highinfidelity]

As for "highinfidelity" (hyuck hyuck), it's clear he's completely clueless about the technological limitations of the 2600. Furthermore, he seems to think that just because a game diverges from its arcade inspiration in any way, that makes it automatically bad. He probably has no idea that Yars' Revenge started life as a Star Castle port. By his way of thinking, that makes Yars' Revenge the worst game ever, or as he would say, "as bad as it can be".

What made you jump to these conclusions? I have dealt with the 2600 for some 35 years so I think I know well enough what it can do and what it can't. I have been here by almost the same number of years that you did, by the way. I have even designed a mod for the Supercharger that has been defined (here on these pages) "the cleanest ever seen", so I'm quite confident with hardware also. But even if we forget the past, my first post begins with references to sprites and background limitations, considerations about cart memory with (exact) figures and timelines, side-by-side comparisons with arcade machines as well as comparisons with other reknown ports. Does that look like the post of a newby?

 

Or is it perhaps the simple fact that I don't share your opinion, so it MUST be the opinion of a dunce? Is this the reason why you speak about me in third person, to insult me any better?

 

And yes indeed: I consider Yar's Revenge a poor game with unimpressive graphics that look almost like an unfinished project. The matter have been intensively and extensively debated both here as well as on Atarinvader (when it still was on line), and the salomonic conclusion has been that it's one of those games that you love or hate, with no way in between. Quite obviously I'm on the hate side.

[Tin_Lunchbox]

Apologies to whoever may have felt offended by my limited lexicon.

 

There's nothing to apologize for. Your lexicon is quite good. Your comment about "look at it with open eyes" is totally inoffensive. I went back and reviewed it. It is just saying to consider the game analytically. If you had said that in a pointed jab at another poster, implying that he or she walks around with closed eyes, it could *possibly* be taken as criticism. But yours was the first comment.

 

I disagree with you totally about the quality of Asteroids for the 2600/Video Arcade. It's great! The harlequin colors you dislike are great! Some of our resident coders explained why the larger asteroids did not move diagonally, that it's a technical limitation. Like I said, I think the programmer realized he couldn't really do Asteroids faithfully to the arcade, so he set out to instead to make a fun game that used the Atari 2600's strengths. Like color.

 

And I also disagree with you that 2600 Asteroids lovers' opinions are distorted by warm and fuzzy childhood memories. If that were the case, then why wouldn't it have happened with Pac-Man, which almost everybody criticizes?

 

You should try variation four. The reason I settled on variation four was that I thought it got closest to the arcade version. I couldn't even really tell you what the other 65 variations are, except that some are two-player, and some don't have diagonally-moving small asteroids.

[NE146]

and some don't have diagonally-moving small asteroids.

 

That would be the odd numbered games. Rule of thumb in 2600 Asteroids: play the even numbered variations

 

Although I think it ended up doing the game a disservice since many people (and store displays) would obviously just turn the game on and play the first game variation, GAME 1... So the entire game they end up just shooting at the rock curtains to the left and right.

[highinfidelity]

You should try variation four.

Thanks for your kind reply, and believe me, I tried it as well as most (if not all) other variants. I obviously reckon that some variants are more challenging than variant 1, but still it doesn't catch me.

 

I appreciate your points about the quality of the game, but my main point once again is not quality in absolute terms but the fact that they used an impressive 8Kb cart to make room for an unimpressive game. Had it been 4Kb, I'd just say "well allright, what would you expect from 4Kb in the seventies? Those multi-colored pop corns are cute after all". Although, still, I would definitely not put it in a "all times best" list.

 

By the way I'm also among those who think that Pac-Man wasn't so bad, all things considered in perspective. I also think that its role in the video game crash was much lesser than it is described today: I don't remember any of my friends complaining that it was "a bad port" or such, perhaps they have perceived it later, when new consoles and home computers with better ports came in, but at that point the video game crash was already past, so there couldn't have been any cause/effect relation. However, its presumed relation to the crash has been so much overstated and overquoted in the past years that I suppose we have to live with it now.

Edited June 14, 2012 by highinfidelity

[ZylonBane]

And yes indeed: I consider Yar's Revenge a poor game with unimpressive graphics that look almost like an unfinished project.

 

I see. So the problem isn't that you think Asteroids made poor use of 8K. The problem is that you have weird, terrible taste in games.

[Rybags]

Hang on. So, you don't like Asteroids but think Pacman was OK?

 

Pacman was rightly described as a turd, and subsequent releases (e.g. Ms, Jr) and hacks proved a much more faithful representation was possible.

[highinfidelity]

Have I written anywhere that Pac-Man was OK, perhaps? It was in the average of what you could expect from Atari back then, that's all.

Edited June 14, 2012 by highinfidelity

[toiletunes]

Asteroids looks like a 4k game. I don't know what the extra 4k was used for- the later version has a titlescreen, so there must have been some unused space in the code somewhere. Beyond that, I have no idea.

[ComputerSpaceFan]

many people (and store displays) would obviously just turn the game on and play the first game variation, GAME 1...

 

<holds hand up> Guilty as charged, I will try variation 4

 

We should make a thread about the hidden gems beyond Variation 1 in all games because there are some great variations out there (Surround v4 and Super Breakout v7 being excellent examples). Heck, I never played Berzerk v3 back in the day so I always assumed Evil Otto was never included on the cart.

[Trinity]

It's not that bad! Game 4 with ufo's.

 

Now... What do you all think of starpath's sucide mission???

[Trinity]

Post hi-score's please. Game 4 with ufo's.

[Torr]

many people (and store displays) would obviously just turn the game on and play the first game variation, GAME 1...

 

<holds hand up> Guilty as charged, I will try variation 4

 

We should make a thread about the hidden gems beyond Variation 1 in all games because there are some great variations out there (Surround v4 and Super Breakout v7 being excellent examples). Heck, I never played Berzerk v3 back in the day so I always assumed Evil Otto was never included on the cart.

 

Yes I think the old games should have had the standard arcade style play as Game 1 and if you wanted to makes the asteroids no go at angles or remove the UFOs & saucers THEN you would have to choose a variation. Not the other way around. And Asteroids isn't the only one guilty of this.

[Pioneer4x4]

It's not that bad! Game 4 with ufo's.

 

Now... What do you all think of starpath's sucide mission???

Excellent except for the colors.

[Cynicaster]

 

the game action only vaguely recalls that of the arcade

True of most home ports of the day.

 

 

Which is why, with few exceptions, I personally view home ports from the 8-bit era as completely obsolete and unnecessary for anything other than collector/sentimental value. I can't understand how anybody can play most of those ports today for more than 5 minutes without being bored to tears. If I want to play Asteroids at home (which I do semi-regularly), it's MAME all the way.

 

I've always preferred the 2600 "native" titles to the half-assed ports. Even the supposedly good ports (like Ms. Pac-Man), if looked at with any objectivity at all, are still dreadfully crude approximations at best. The native titles were generally more focused on harnessing what little resources were available on the meager hardware to make a fun game, rather than harnessing what little resources were available in a vain attempt to imitate the capabilities of much more advanced hardware. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna go play some Atari 2600 Amidar....

[NE146]

I can't understand how anybody can play most of those ports today for more than 5 minutes without being bored to tears. If I want to play Asteroids at home (which I do semi-regularly), it's MAME all the way.

 

I've always preferred the 2600 "native" titles to the half-assed ports. Even the supposedly good ports (like Ms. Pac-Man), if looked at with any objectivity at all, are still dreadfully crude approximations at best.

 

True to a certain extent (as you said, Amidar ). However several 2600 ports have a charm & playability all their own. I for one am a huge fan of 2600 Ms. Pacman, even though I'm no slouch at the arcade version either (my high is ~300k). The 2600 version has it's own feel, has unique mazes (so does Tutankham), and I see it as almost a standalone title in a way. Ditto for other titles like Crystal Castles. Honestly I would rather play the 2600 version of CC over the arcade version even on a real cab. Again, it has it's own gameplay despite being based on the arcade version. Missile Command, Reactor, and PB Frogger are other good examples of games that stand on their own despite their big brothers.

 

And with homebrews it's through the roof with Medieval Mayhem, Crazy Balloon, Ladybug more than matching up to the full arcade versions. .

 

But yeah... that said, of course it's true that many titles (e.g. Double Dragon) pale in comparison in every way.

[Tinman]

I never spent that much time in arcades, so most of my experience with "arcade" games was on our Atari. So I still prefer the Atari versions of most games, including Asteroids, Space Invaders, and even Pac-Man, to the arcade originals. For one thing, they're a lot easier, since I've played them so much more.

[ZylonBane]

For one thing, they're a lot easier, since I've played them so much more.

 

It's not because you've played them more. They ARE easier, full stop. Home games, unlike arcade games, do not have a profit motive to kill you as fast as possible.

[Cynicaster]

I can't understand how anybody can play most of those ports today for more than 5 minutes without being bored to tears. If I want to play Asteroids at home (which I do semi-regularly), it's MAME all the way.

 

I've always preferred the 2600 "native" titles to the half-assed ports. Even the supposedly good ports (like Ms. Pac-Man), if looked at with any objectivity at all, are still dreadfully crude approximations at best.

 

True to a certain extent (as you said, Amidar ). However several 2600 ports have a charm & playability all their own. I for one am a huge fan of 2600 Ms. Pacman, even though I'm no slouch at the arcade version either (my high is ~300k). The 2600 version has it's own feel, has unique mazes (so does Tutankham), and I see it as almost a standalone title in a way. Ditto for other titles like Crystal Castles. Honestly I would rather play the 2600 version of CC over the arcade version even on a real cab. Again, it has it's own gameplay despite being based on the arcade version. Missile Command, Reactor, and PB Frogger are other good examples of games that stand on their own despite their big brothers.

 

And with homebrews it's through the roof with Medieval Mayhem, Crazy Balloon, Ladybug more than matching up to the full arcade versions. .

 

But yeah... that said, of course it's true that many titles (e.g. Double Dragon) pale in comparison in every way.

 

I’ve never played any of the homebrews, but of the commercial titles you mentioned, Frogger is the only one I can still play today.

 

Games like 2600 Missile Command, Centipede, and Crystal Castles—even if they’re decent titles relative to the catalog of games they come from—just plain suck to me because of the joystick controls, in the same way that Pac-Man sucks on the iPad with swipe controls (ok, they’re not THAT bad). Some games are designed from the ground up to be played through a very specific type of physical interface, so to substitute in a generic one-size-fits-all controller dilutes the experience to the point of rendering it empty. If I’m driving a slick sports car, I want the nice, circular, leather-wrapped steering wheel that was engineered for that particular car; not a set of vice grips clamped on a hex nut in the steering column.

 

One thing I see time and again in these types of discussions is that most folks seem to argue that a certain version of a game or a certain console is superior to all else simply because it is what they remember fondly from their younger years, as if such reasoning, in and of itself, retains any objective relevance whatsoever outside of their own personal perspective. Therefore I feel compelled to note that my stance on this has nothing to do with “sticking to what you grew up with”, because the 2600 versions of the classic titles are, almost exclusively, the ones I grew up with. With few exceptions, I never even played the arcade versions of most early classics at all until last year when I built my MAME cabinet. Now that I have experienced the original versions, the primitive ports just seem like cheap knock-offs.

 

Don’t get me wrong, I haven’t lost sight of where the ports came from; namely, an era when the options for home gaming were very limited. Because of that, the only value these games continue to hold for me is in the memories they provided me with; their relevance as practical instruments of entertainment has long since dried up. Today, if I’m hit with the urge to play some Missile Command, I’m never in a million years going to choose the 2600 version (even though I probably have 4 copies of it) when the MAME cabinet with trackball is 20 feet away in the same room—it’s just not gonna happen.

 

I know everybody is going to have a different take on this, but that’s that way it is for me.

[Tinman]

For one thing, they're a lot easier, since I've played them so much more.

 

It's not because you've played them more. They ARE easier, full stop. Home games, unlike arcade games, do not have a profit motive to kill you as fast as possible.

 

Fair enough. Regardless, I enjoy them more than the arcade originals whether or not they are empirically "better" or not.