gamecat80

You should save up a little more money and buy BOTH the Intellivision and ColecoVision! Get the Intellivision first; it should be a little cheaper. As others have said, the Intellivision has more unique/original games (Buzz Bombers, Shark! Shark!, Frog Bog, etc.), while the ColecoVision generally has the better arcade games. I'm usually in the CV forum, but I've been playing my Intellivision a lot this week. Burgertime is a must-have on the Intv -- it's my favorite version! The Imagic games are also very well done. Lots of fun/original games to play on the Intv.

Nice job. I'm not a big Lady Ga Ga fan, but I like me some good 8-bit chiptune music!

Yes, crisper........or "cleaner". Sprites with more solid, bright colors look "clean" to me. Gives a more "cartoony" look, which I like. Some prefer more colors. The FM synth sounds sure as hell don't exist in nature either - they actually sound LESS natural to me than do pure square/triangle sound waves. Not a purist, I just like what I like and don't care what everyone else thinks. Seriously? That does make my ears hurt and reinforces what I think. I'd take the TI, AY, POKEY, and Ricoh soundchips any day over the YM "synth" soundchip. To each his/hers own. Btw, I understand that the early arcades mostly used TI and AY soundchips. Here are a couple examples: In a way, some old systems like Intellivision and ColecoVision sound more "arcade" than later systems because they used the same soundchips as the early arcades. It's just that each arcade machine usually used multiple TI or AY soundchips for more channels and made better use of those chips than did the home consoles.

@ JamesD - I can see what you are saying for the CV to OUTSELL the NES to the general public would need all those "upgrades". But I still think the stock CV could have competed well with the NES, with the NES only starting to outsell the CV by the late 80s. Once you add extra graphics and sound chips, it is no longer the same system. I have listened to the FM Yamaha soundchip. It's what I thought it was: cheap, tinny synth sound, typical of the 16-bit consoles. I much prefer the more basic "pure sound waves" soundchips of the 8-bit consoles. Pure square and triangle soundwaves just sound better to me (cleaner and fuller) for early video games than do cheap synth sounds, imo. I don't get all the "hype" I've seen for the FM sound - I guess because it's more "complex"? Whatev. Same thing for the video/graphics chips. I could argue the "limited" 16-colors give a "cleaner" look graphically. The colors are bright and vibrant on the CV - moreso than on my other old consoles. Once you add lots and lots of color shadings, it can "dirty up" the graphics, imo. Smooth animation is also a big part of graphics, and the CV is able to do that well. As I stated before, it is the "clean" look and "clean" sound of the CV that attracted me to it. The CV does "cartoony" games very well (Smurf Rescue, Monkey Academy, Rock N Rope, etc.) due to it's bright solid colors, smooth animation and rounded sprites :!:

@ JamesD - I don't know as much as many here about hardware, I just know what looks and sounds good. The ColecoVision looks and sounds like an arcade compared to other consoles of the late 70s / early 80s. The TI soundchip sounds comparable to the POKEY to me. Heck the SMS basically uses the same soundchip and came out four years after the CV! I look at it this way: The Atari 2600 was a big step up in graphics and sound from the Channel F. Then Intellivision came out a couple years later. It was a step up in graphics and sound. ColecoVision came out a couple years after that and, again, a step up in graphics and sound. The NES was yet another step up in graphics and sound. Btw, wasn't the Atari 2600 on the market 'till 1991 or so to "compete" with the NES? If that is the case, then the ColecoVision sure as hell could have "competed" with the NES since it was much more advanced than the 2600. I think of the ColecoVision as smack dab between the Intellivision and NES in graphics and sound. In the end, the "rise and fall" of game systems was a mix of timing, marketing and business decisions :!:

Duck Tales (NES) Clash at Demonhead (NES) Athena (NES)

Just off the top of my head: Donkey Kong -- Atari 2600, Intellivision, ColecoVision. Dragonfire -- Atari 2600, Intellivision, ColecoVision. Pitfall -- Atari 2600, Intellivision, ColecoVision. Q-Bert -- Atari 2600, Atari 5200, ColecoVision. Mario Bros -- Atari 5200, Atari 7800, ColecoVision (homebrew). Jungle Hunt -- Atari 2600, Atari 5200, ColecoVision. Frogger -- Atari 2600, Atari 5200, ColecoVision. ******************************************************************** Of course a few of those are on a SD multicart edit: just remembered Frogger

It's funny you say that because I'm left-handed and have no problems with the NES d-pad controllers Maybe it's because I grew up with the NES and it's controllers. But I think they are some of the best controllers ever made -- reliable, comfortable and very responsive. On the other hand, I have more trouble using Atari 2600-style joysticks...

I will agree that the 5200 has much more color shadings and detail in those games compared to the CV versions. But the CV game versions have more rounded graphics, smoother animation and much better controls - even with the stiff knob controller. I find some games like Frogger, Q*Bert and even Jungle Hunt to be almost unplayable on the Atari 5200. The ColecoVision versions of those games play much, much better.

Wow, you got lucky Even without overlays that's dirt cheap for that system.

IMO, the ColecoVision is very much comparable to the Atari 5200/400. As someone who grew up with the NES and started collecting retro consoles and games a couple years ago, I can tell you the CV games just look more refined/polished than on the Atari 5200. The sprites are more rounded and the animation/movement smoother on the CV. Compare Jungle Hunt on both systems. Don't get me wrong, I like the Atari 5200 (even though mine crapped out weeks ago ), and I know the 5200 has a bigger color palette than the CV. But the CV graphics and animation (not to be confused with scrolling) just appear smoother and more polished. And homebrew CV games like Mario Bros. are very much comparable (in some ways better) to the NES version. You gotta remember - the ColecoVision was only on the market for 2+ years. That's not enough time to learn the full potential/capabilities of the system. Later games like Tarzan (in that early 2-year period) show more what the CV was capable of...

I gotta say the first time I saw Super Mario Bros. on the NES I was absolutely blown away! I had never seen or heard a game like that before. We had moved about a mile away to another neighborhood back in the summer of 1988, and we still had our basic Commodore 64. We started visiting other kids in the new neighborhood and one kid we visited had the NES and was playing SMB on it. I was like after seeing it....and we soon got our own NES! Both the ColecoVison and Nintendo Entertainment System were ahead of their time.

I actually like the solid colors on the CV - it gives it a very "clean" look graphically. But I do see what you are talking about. Some games would look nicer with more color shadings. It's interesting you mention the scrolling. That's why I mentioned Jungle Hunt animation. I know animation and scrolling aren't the same, but just wanted to point it out. I'm a big fan of smooth animation. The crocodiles and vine movements and the jumping in that game are butter-smooth on the CV. The "rounded" sprites on the CV Jungle Hunt almost look like colored-paper cut outs "floating" on screen from a distance. On the 5200 version, those movements are jerky. CV Smurf Rescue has smooth jumping too as well as countless other games. But you are right - CV games like Zaxxon and Cosmic Avenger have jerky scrolling. The thing I like about the 7800 is that it really never flickers or slows down. That is the strong point of the 7800. Animation can be butter-smooth on the 7800 (Winter Games, Ballblazer, etc.) Just wish the sound was better on the 7800 IMO, there is no excuse for not including POKEY on the 7800 - Atari was being TOO cheap. I don't think it would have cost them much more and they still would have made a good profit!

I personally think there isn't a huge difference between the ColecoVision, 7800, and 5200 graphics. The ColecoVision has a certain refined quality to it that the Atari systems lack, whether it is sound (7800) or controls (5200), or something else. No system is perfect. I just have the most overall fun playing my CV out of my retro systems. I enjoy my 7800, but I don't have nearly as many games for it, and the sound is.......bleh................ I did enjoy playing my 5200, but it finally crapped out on me a few weeks ago One good way to compare systems is looking for same games on the systems. Compare Jungle Hunt on the ColecoVision and 5200. The 5200 version has more detailing of the riverbed and tree canopy, but the CV version has much smoother animation/movement and the sprites are noticeably more rounded. The 5200 sprites always look slightly blocky in comparison. Everyone talks about the good 5200 POKEY sound, but I think the CV TI soundchip is comparable. The 7800 sounds crude and harsh in comparison. Impossible Mission and DK are the worst sound offenders, imo But non-POKEY games like Food Fight and Dig Dug have very decent sound, so I think part of it HAS to be the programmers :!:

Hey all, Been lurking here for over a year, finally joined. Anyway, as for the CV vs. NES graphics, I think the NES graphics are maybe more detailed, while the CV graphics have a cleaner look. The Atari 7800 is somewhere between the CV and NES graphics, imo. I grew up with the C64, NES and 7800 and started collecting other retro systems a couple years ago. It was the clean-looking/clean-sounding ColecoVision games that I saw online that impressed me to get a CV a year ago. Bought some carts as well as the Ultimate SD cart and play it almost every day