Is the 5200 such a "SUPER" System?

[Nukey Shay]

At that time?

 

lol

I'd imagine that the majority of the prospective customers would try to make sense out of the odd contraption they see before them...then never look at it again. Pac-Man machines would be pushed to the cobwebby corners of the arcades, and the character would have never made it home in any form.

 

Pac-Man as George Bailey.

[MIKE5200]

I find the 5200 controller to be beneficial to a few games: Pole Position, Missile Command, Galaxian, River Raid.

I've never even had to rebuild my controller and it works fine. Still using Rev 7 flexi and stock carbon dot buttons with no foil or any upgrades.

 

Your lucky then. I have to take mine apart to clean the reflex where the fire buttons go on bothsides every two months.

[zylon]

I find the 5200 controller to be beneficial to a few games: Pole Position, Missile Command, Galaxian, River Raid.

I've never even had to rebuild my controller and it works fine. Still using Rev 7 flexi and stock carbon dot buttons with no foil or any upgrades.

 

Your lucky then. I have to take mine apart to clean the reflex where the fire buttons go on bothsides every two months.

I think I've cleaned the flexi once in last 10 years. I've rebuilt 2 controllers, but my old one still works fine and seems better than the others. I use it almost daily.

[Jess Ragan]

Must we do this again?

 

Look, everyone's going to have a horse in this race. Personally, I prefer the Atari 5200, because the graphics, while chunky, are more colorful and move more smoothly. You ever see scrolling in a ColecoVision game? Four out of five times it's horrendous. Smooth scrolling and bright colorful characters are crucial to the arcade experience, and generally speaking, the ColecoVision doesn't offer either. You will see exceptions to the rule (exhibit A: Pac-Man Collection) but even those games are hobbled by the CV's mostly barfy sixteen color palette.

 

The controllers are a non-issue. They're BAD on both systems (IMO, good controller design was a rarity until the NES was released) but both can be replaced with some effort. I jury-rigged a CV controller to work with a Genesis six button pad, and created an adapter for the 5200 with help from another AtariAge member. I would never go back to stock on either system, because those joysticks are unresponsive and pure hell on the hands. To its credit, though, the 5200 has the optional Wico Command Control, which is everything a game controller should be and a pre-crash game controller almost never is. The joystick glides where others stiffly jerk into place, the buttons have a near-arcade quality feel (number two is too small, though), and there are options to adjust the sensitivity and even lock and unlock the centering. It's the Rolls Royce of early game sticks, and it remains a mystery how its ColecoVision counterpart could have wound up so stinking bad.

[+wood_jl]

I find the 5200 controller to be beneficial to a few games: Pole Position, Missile Command, Galaxian, River Raid.

I've never even had to rebuild my controller and it works fine. Still using Rev 7 flexi and stock carbon dot buttons with no foil or any upgrades.

 

I've been one to "knock" the 5200 controllers too, BUT, don't forget "Star Raiders" as one of the games that a properly-working 5200 controller is great with. You can "whip around" and face the enemy quicker when warping into an enemy-occupied sector.....than with a 2600 stick on the Atari 400.

[high voltage]

Personally for a European, Coleco of course, as there was no 5200.

I received a 5200 from Russ Perry in the early 90s though.

Loved my Coleco/Adam/printer, joined the UK Adam user group, great fun. Adam had some very good games. And Amiga made a good Coleco stick anyway.

Edited July 17, 2011 by high voltage

[zylon]

I find the 5200 controller to be beneficial to a few games: Pole Position, Missile Command, Galaxian, River Raid.

I've never even had to rebuild my controller and it works fine. Still using Rev 7 flexi and stock carbon dot buttons with no foil or any upgrades.

 

I've been one to "knock" the 5200 controllers too, BUT, don't forget "Star Raiders" as one of the games that a properly-working 5200 controller is great with. You can "whip around" and face the enemy quicker when warping into an enemy-occupied sector.....than with a 2600 stick on the Atari 400.

Actually, that's one of the games I scrap to Al whenever I find one. I could never figure it out and always wind up rolling through space.

[Cebus Capucinis]

Must we do this again?

 

Do a search, you'll find this exact same debate has been going on for years, likely a decade plus. You'll also notice some of the exact same quotes (just like political soundbites) being said for literally 5+ years. Word for word, sometimes even in threads that have absolutely nothing to do with the controller debacle.

 

It's more than a little pathetic, to be completely honest, that the debate has to rage on for so long. I figure live and let live as far as the 5200 goes. Some like the controllers, some don't -- that's just the way it is. Both sides need to stop trying to convince the universe that their side is the cosmic "Correct".

[akator]

I love both systems. Add a Vectrex to the mix, and all 3 together create an amazing home arcade experience for the time.

 

In the 80s when these machines were current, I was a teenager and could play either the 5200 or Colecovision controllers with no complaints other than the occasional blister or hand cramp from marathons. But hell, if you were playing for several hours straight those showed up no matter what controller you were using. At the time, I did not think the Colecovision or 5200 controllers were that bad.

 

Now I'm middle-aged with arthritis and far less desire to use something that requires hand gymnastics. Now I complain about how horrible the controllers are, but in the 80s I thought they were amazing.

[+wood_jl]

I find the 5200 controller to be beneficial to a few games: Pole Position, Missile Command, Galaxian, River Raid.

I've never even had to rebuild my controller and it works fine. Still using Rev 7 flexi and stock carbon dot buttons with no foil or any upgrades.

 

I've been one to "knock" the 5200 controllers too, BUT, don't forget "Star Raiders" as one of the games that a properly-working 5200 controller is great with. You can "whip around" and face the enemy quicker when warping into an enemy-occupied sector.....than with a 2600 stick on the Atari 400.

Actually, that's one of the games I scrap to Al whenever I find one. I could never figure it out and always wind up rolling through space.

 

!!!! Get a manual (or pdf/webpage)! You'll love this game!!!! It's broke new ground, for sure! In a few minutes, you'll have great fun.

[SpaceDice2010]

How I look at the Colecovision vs Atari 5200 controller issue - They both sucked. However, there were certain games that the Atrai controller worked really well on, something I can't say about the CV controller. With that said, the Atari 5200 had the Wico controller which is an absolute joy to use. I prefer that over the stock 2600 controller any day.

[zylon]

I find the 5200 controller to be beneficial to a few games: Pole Position, Missile Command, Galaxian, River Raid.

I've never even had to rebuild my controller and it works fine. Still using Rev 7 flexi and stock carbon dot buttons with no foil or any upgrades.

 

I've been one to "knock" the 5200 controllers too, BUT, don't forget "Star Raiders" as one of the games that a properly-working 5200 controller is great with. You can "whip around" and face the enemy quicker when warping into an enemy-occupied sector.....than with a 2600 stick on the Atari 400.

Actually, that's one of the games I scrap to Al whenever I find one. I could never figure it out and always wind up rolling through space.

 

!!!! Get a manual (or pdf/webpage)! You'll love this game!!!! It's broke new ground, for sure! In a few minutes, you'll have great fun.

I did keep an A8 copy. Still not fond of it though.

Edited July 17, 2011 by zylon

[Lord Helmet]

I love them both, but usually play the 5200. As far as controllers go, they suck for both. Any controller with thumb busting fire buttons on the sides is going to be bad. The 5200, CV, 7800, and INTV all suffer from this problem.

[jetset]

Must we do this again?

 

just like political soundbites

 

 

Interesting comparison. Bashing an Atari system on an Atari website? You wouldn't go to Fox News.com and bash Reagan, or Al Gore.com and discount global warming. Not without someone calling you out on how stupid that is. Wrong audience. I'd expect on the websites above fanboyism for the other side rarely goes unchecked.

Edited July 17, 2011 by jetset

[zylon]

The 5200 gets more than its share of dissing and insults. Some are deserved, some are not. Most of the threads in the 5200 forum itself are the same old complaints, and repair issues that run on forever. I'd personally rank it 3rd in best Atari systems.

1: 8bits(400,800,xl,xe, etc)

2: 2600

3: 5200

4: Lynx

5: Jaguar

6: 7800(2600 compatibility not a considering factor)

 

I wasn't in love with CV controls, but didn't hate them either. I just didn't find enough reason to keep one.

[Jess Ragan]

I like the 5200 a lot. It was a pronounced step up from the 2600 and it could have gone a long way if not for the crash. It actually DID go a long way, since the XEGS is similar in many respects. Atari just fixed all the problems with the previous machine and added a lot more memory.

 

Of course, I may be saying this as a person who got into the 5200 early. I first played the system when I was about eight and spent a lot of time with a friend's machine a couple of years later. I was a jaded teenager when I first bought the ColecoVision (17? 18?), and from all I had read I was expecting NES-quality performance. It didn't come anywhere near that standard, though. The only game that even approaches that watermark is Antarctic Adventure, designed by a developer that would go on to make a name for itself on the Nintendo Entertainment System.

 

That supposed "perfect" port of Donkey Kong was so far from perfect it was ridiculous... I can't believe how many of its flaws people were willing to forgive. It would be easy to say "Oh well, it was good for the time," but the reality is that it wasn't. The VIC-20 version was an eyesore but it had all four stages and the intermissions, something conspicuously absent from the ColecoVision game. The Atari computer version of Donkey Kong was also superior, and the only thing that kept it from being published on the 5200 were licensing issues. Fortunately, hackers don't give a crap about licensing, so we can enjoy the game on that system now.

[VectorGamer]

That supposed "perfect" port of Donkey Kong was so far from perfect it was ridiculous... I can't believe how many of its flaws people were willing to forgive. It would be easy to say "Oh well, it was good for the time," but the reality is that it wasn't.

 

But at that time it was forgiving. The "perfect" part was in regard to the graphics despite the fact in retrospect we know better. Also, the average gamer would have never made it to the pie factory level on Donkey Kong in the arcade so to them the three stages included was enough to give them the arcade fix.

 

At that time (and correct me if I'm wrong on the market share figures)the 2600 was the #1 home console, followed by the Intellivision and Odyssey 2. None of those systems really delivered the "arcade experience to the home" like Donkey Kong for the ColecoVision when it was released (if BurgerTime and Lock N Chase were released on the Intelli before this, then it was because A: the larger install base at the time was 2600 B: the popularity of BurgerTime and Lock N Chase versus Donkey Kong).

 

Coleco went on a media blitz with the "Arcade Experience In Your Home" campaign so when gamers saw Donkey Kong they believed it (and the 5200 was not yet released). Coleco's decision to pack Donkey Kong with the ColecoVision was a success and meanwhile Atari shot themselves in the foot with Super Breakout as the pack-in for the 5200. At least Atari could have "Pac'd-in" a different title and if not that title then Pole Position to show off how the controller can work well with a driving game.

 

The arcades were fun but parents got tired of forking over a roll of quarters every 15 minutes to their kids that could barely play. So, for them the ColecoVision saved them money in the long run and they could say (if the kid didn't tell them first) "this is just like the arcade game."

 

 

The VIC-20 version was an eyesore but it had all four stages and the intermissions, something conspicuously absent from the ColecoVision game. The Atari computer version of Donkey Kong was also superior,

 

Computers were still foreign to a lot of people and because of that people were not yet convinced to justify the purchase of one. Since Junior still had his Atari sitting in the rec room getting his fill of inferior Pac-Man carts everything else a computer could offer still worked using a paper and pen or typewriter instead.

 

The argument of which system is better is fruitless. In any event, we know that whether it was Atari or Coleco things could have been done better.

[MIKE5200]

I find the 5200 controller to be beneficial to a few games: Pole Position, Missile Command, Galaxian, River Raid.

I've never even had to rebuild my controller and it works fine. Still using Rev 7 flexi and stock carbon dot buttons with no foil or any upgrades.

 

Your lucky then. I have to take mine apart to clean the reflex where the fire buttons go on bothsides every two months.

I think I've cleaned the flexi once in last 10 years. I've rebuilt 2 controllers, but my old one still works fine and seems better than the others. I use it almost daily.

Hey i'm not bashing this system. I like both 2600 and 5200 though it seems like you do have to work alittle harder on this one.

[GreenDayRlz]

You're comparing the Coleco Vision it to a system that competed with the 2600? Yeah, 5200 is very powerful then indeed to beat the CV.

[Cebus Capucinis]

Not without someone calling you out on how stupid that is.

 

But that's my point, and that's why I'm making the equation. Why is one side or the other "stupid" in this instance? The arguments that are always presented for 5200 vs. threads (5200 vs. CV, 5200 vs. INTV, 5200 vs. a paperweight, 5200 vs. a trash can, whatever) or, to be more accurate, any and all "vs" or "contrast" threads, are presented in such a "my way or the highway" interpretation that it becomes almost religious or political in nature, or at least on some equivalent wavelength. If you look at the arguments provided, almost all of them end up being easy-to-digest, simple statements that don't really further any sort of discourse, understanding, or comprehension of the conversation -- it's just "soundbites". What to me is knee-jerk reaction to statements that are made for whatever side of the fence opposes the position an individual may be in, no matter what side of the fence that individual is on. The positions are rarely presented in a cogent, rational manner, and it almost always devolves into "He used that statement, I better immediately counter with this other one" rather than any sort of realistic conversation.

 

Maybe that's just my interpretation of it, being someone who isn't really on one side or other of the "does the 5200 rock or suck" debate. I like the 5200 as a console. It has a dearth of fun games that Atari really took a great, innovative approach with and they definitely blazed trails in great ways with the system. Some were successful, some weren't, for reasons of varying rationality. As mentioned, the quintessential Star Raiders experience can't be found anywhere but the 5200. But the console isn't without its faults. The joysticks are prone to failure and although innovative, they aren't necessarily the best solution to optimal control schemes for certain games. The similarity to the A8 line brings in a different universe into consideration when thinking about the console's merits, as it does many things identically to the A8 line.

 

The ColecoVision is the same with me. There's a wide variety of underdog, great performing games that you can't get anywhere else. The console was equivalent to the 5200 in that it was an attempt to innovate in a lot of different ways, with measures of both success and lack of success. The controllers are equally not the optimum control scheme for a number of titles on the system, just as is the case with the Atari 5200. The graphics may seem "crisper" but there's scrolling issues, etc. as others have pointed out.

 

Both are interesting for different reasons, and both are just as "meritable" in my book for success. They each hold standing in my personal collection and both get play time. But to think that either of them is somehow some sort of "end all" solution to any sort of debate does no service to the engineers, technicians, and programmers who innovated video games in such unique ways and developed ideas in directions that still can be seen in video games today.

 

I just don't get the debate at all, I guess. I don't understand why it exists in the first place, let alone why people can be so passionate about it and so concerned about it that they have to resort to point/counterpoint style political-esque debate with no compromise, no understanding of the merit of the other side's arguments, and no ability to think outside the confines of their own opinions to understand where the other party is coming from in their experience. Thinking outside the box and coming up with different approaches and solutions was EXACTLY what both these consoles were about -- and as stated, it does no service to either of them to fall prey to closed-minded thinking about them, no matter which end of the spectrum one lies on. I don't think the fact that this is an Atari-centric website should exclude anyone from being open-minded about both constructive (key word: constructive) criticism of engineering design or structure of the thing we all come together to enjoy. Same applies to Coleco, INTV, APF, Fairchild Channel F, no matter what you're thinking about -- excluding the merits of those systems simply due to the title of a website is doing even less service to the thing we all enjoy and love.

 

I don't know, I don't really "bash" any console or anything like that I guess (or if I do, it is purely in jest and never meant to be taken literally). I understand that each of them have their strengths and weaknesses but that's exactly what makes each of them such a unique and interesting part of collecting video games.

[SpaceDice2010]

+1 to Cebus

[jaybird3rd]

I just don't get the debate at all, I guess. I don't understand why it exists in the first place, let alone why people can be so passionate about it and so concerned about it that they have to resort to point/counterpoint style political-esque debate with no compromise, no understanding of the merit of the other side's arguments, and no ability to think outside the confines of their own opinions to understand where the other party is coming from in their experience.

Agreed. I participate at times in "Vs." threads, too, but I don't do it because I'm out to "right the wrongs of history" or to change anyone's gaming preferences. I share my experiences, and I try to raise awareness of underappreciated systems I am familiar with (like the Intellivision) when I sense that popular impressions of them are incorrect or incomplete, but it's silly to try to do more than that. It's especially silly all these years later, when one can easily afford to buy and enjoy both the 5200 and the ColecoVision, instead of drawing lines in the sand and making the choice between them into a dramatic "either-or" proposition.

[Cebus Capucinis]

I guess I've just always taken a "It's either FOR ME or NOT FOR ME" approach with collecting. There are things that are "for me" that I personally enjoy and that I find of particular value or merit, and then there are things that are "not for me", in that I didn't personally find enough merit or value in them to warrant delving further into collecting them and keeping them around.

 

Does the fact that a console is "not for me" mean it inherently has zero value or merit to everyone else out there? Certainly not, and I wouldn't be so presumptuous as to assume that I've discovered some sort of secret knowledge that will instantly sway everyone else's opinion to be exactly like my own. For example, I didn't like the Virtual Boy when I purchased one and tried it. I found it too bulky and eye-straining. Does it necessarily follow that by logic the Virtual Boy has no value as a console? Not in the slightest, and I can appreciate what innovations were taking place in its creation and am thankful I had the experience in the first place.

 

There are things I dislike and things I like, but the same can be said of anyone out there in any particular subject, be it something as complex as socio-political economics or something as simple as an 80s video game on a certain system. To assume that everyone else has some inherent need to like the things I personally like and dislike the things I personally dislike and that I must convince every other person not only that I'm right but that the need exists in the first place is, for lack of a better way of putting it, being egotistical enough to equate myself to Siddhartha Gautama or Jesus Christ (of course, in this case being either of those personages for classic video games), and to be completely honest, I'm well aware that I'm nowhere near that important, on a global scale or even a small corner of a retro video game forum.

 

I speak of all Vs. threads or "console debates" in this position, not just the particular one at hand, nor am I insinuating I agree with one side or another. I think both the PRO and CON sides are equally presumptuous in their closed-minded debate.

[littleman jack]

To answer the original poster's title for this thread, "Yes, the 5200 is super." And I'm quite fond of the 8-bit computers and the 2600 as well.

 

The controllers are not super on the 5200 as many have pointed out, but the games and the console itself, gigantic and sturdy, are excellent. It was exciting in the 80s and is still a great system. I hope that the homebrewers give it some more attention, as it's falling behind as the 2600 and 7800 keep raking in great homebrews. It also has some excellent homebrews, but they seem to be coming in at a slower pace than for the other two oldest Atari consoles. But again, yes, it's super. Break one out and fire up Centipede, Countermeasure, Beef Drop, or Adventure II and see what all the fuss is about.

[jaybird3rd]

I guess I've just always taken a "It's either FOR ME or NOT FOR ME" approach with collecting. There are things that are "for me" that I personally enjoy and that I find of particular value or merit, and then there are things that are "not for me", in that I didn't personally find enough merit or value in them to warrant delving further into collecting them and keeping them around.

Yes. What I find most puzzling is the level of fanaticism that develops around systems that certain types of people decide are "for them". These people aren't content to share their enthusiasm for something that they appreciate and enjoy. They go beyond that to making unwarranted statements about people who make different choices than they do: "You have to do X to properly enjoy Y, but you just won't do it because you're too unskilled or lazy to learn how to do X, or you just can't understand how awesome Y is", and so forth. You see behavior like this in what I half-jokingly call "Jaguar disease". I've posted some of my own opinions about why this happens, but I don't know whether they're applicable here or not.