Major_Tom_coming_home

Update: I went ahead and ordered a flashrom 99. Getting a system and access to all of the cartridge games for a total of $120 is pretty sweet. I was watching some ti/99 gameplay footage and I'm quite surprised at how good the games look. For some reason I thought the gaming capabilities were slightly below Atari 2600 but I was mistaken. Maybe my friend had his ti/99 hooked up to a black and white television LOL.

You have been warned. Throwing in a dash of humor... Okay, to be honest I was originally going to get a C64 to go with my TRS-80 Color Computer 2, Amiga 1200, and Atari 800xl. Then I priced them on Ebay (expensive) and heard about all kinds of hardware issues, shady sellers, bad chips, bad power supplies, dogs and cats living together, etc. Maybe I was being paranoid, but there is nothing I HATE more than a hassle and I avoid them at all costs. There seemed to be tons of "untested" C64s on Ebay, and I'm sure we all know what "Untested" means. I love the history, success, and variety the C64 brings to the table, but for now my C64 curiosity will be quenched via emulation. Enter the TI/99. It was a system I was familiar with because a friend of mine had a second hand one from a garage sale when we were kids. I remember being pissed because his TI/99 had more memory than my COCO2. One thing I have learned is that the best things to collect for your wallet are those that have low demand but high supply. For me, this is fun. I casually collect staplers, typewriters, adding machines, old cameras etc. As far as old computers, this seems to be what the TI/99 has going for it. Inexpensive and 'unpopular', but still has enough going for it to be interesting. A Mattel Aquarius or Emerson Arcadia it is not. I just ordered a fully functional one in nice shape with games and joysticks for $65 shipped. Hell yeah!!! The TI/99 seems to have a great bang for the buck. Plus, unlike anything Commodore ever made the black and silver model simply looks bad assed - the computer Darth Vader would use. From what I have heard it also has reliability to match it's appearance. I purposely avoided the beige TI/99, it reminds me of a shitty Packard Bell 486sx POS from 1993. Anyway, it's nice to join the club. Once my TI/99 is set up I'm totally getting the SD cartridge I read about. The TI/99 seems like the perfect system for me: Great value, lots of software, awesome 1970s appearance, well built, affordable, cult classic, underdog etc. If anyone has advice to offer, fire away. I'm happy to report my TI/99 will be coming with Joysticks and Parsec.

Thanks for the advice everyone. It seems like I'm late in the game to get into the C64 at a good price, and that for all the rich history there are potentially frustrating drawbacks with the hardware as well. Maybe I'll just bide my time and keep my eyes open for a good C64 deal and just be content with my yard sale find Amiga 1200. Methinks for now I'll scratch my early 80's computer itch with a TI/99, they seem cheap and reliable even though the games and software are slim pickings. Thanks again folks!

I'm planning to get a C64 from Ebay in the next few months, and was wondering if anyone had buying advice as to which model to get / what I need to be careful about / Are there any critical parts such as video cables or power supplies that are difficult to buy separately etc. In particular, I'm worried about machines that have been 'tested for power' since something that turns on can still be a brick due to something a bad bios chip. Thanks in advance

I have a serious love / hate relationship when it comes to the NES. Nintendo took the risk to enter the post-crash American market and for that they deserved the huge profits, but the monopolistic practices they used to lock out any competition was disgusting, shameful, and should have been ended by the courts of the era. The NES hands down had the best games of the era, Ms. Pac Man and Asteroids on the 7800 are fun games but aren't in the same league as Metroid, Super Mario, or Zelda. Sadly though, your console wouldn't work properly after 6 months due to design flaws but according to Nintendo it was because you were spilling soda into the control deck. I think Nintendo earned the success they had with the NES, but at the same time they earned the initial butt kicking from Sega and the later butt kicking they got from Sony. Twice the pride, twice the fall.

I was just thinking the same thing. I have a good sized 5200 collection so I couldn't justify the Atarimax, but this game and other homebrew is making me reconsider.

Just curious, did you have the cap problems after they had been replaced, or only before? I was thinking of getting a recapped GG and an Everdrive to go with it, but I have a low tolerance when it comes to unreliable or frustrating hardware. Stuff is going to occasionally break on these old handhelds and that is understandable, but I would rather pass if the system needs to be recapped every 1-2 years. I recently got a Lynx and having them side by side to play would be interesting.

Please add me to the list - thanks

I have an Atari 5200 as an adult, but I was around 6-8 years old when the 5200 was released and I never even heard of it until much later. I'm curious about the experiences of folks who either had one or knew about it when it was current generation in 1982-1984. Was the main reason the console flopped really because of the Joysticks and a lack of backwards compatibility, or is that more of a myth? I suspect the joysticks may have hurt it somewhat, but was it really a fatal flaw or just an annoyance? My theory is that if they at least lasted 6 months to a year I don't think that alone killed of the system, and worse case scenario Atari should have been able to redesign and improve them. I also can't imagine that lack of backwards compatibility was a deal breaker either, it would have been nice but I suspect most buyers understood it was a different and more powerful piece of hardware and most of them probably already had a 2600 anyway. My guess is that the problem was: 1) Lack of a killer app and innovation. Many 5200 games were just updates of 2600 games. If you had a 2600 already, the 5200 wasn't going to be much different gameplay wise. 2) The video game market was reaching saturation. Lots of competition for too few buyers. Gaming had become somewhat of a fad as well as a get rich quick bandwagon scheme. 3) I'm thinking Atari was very out of touch. Management saw their product as a kids toy and didn't care about their consumers. They thought you could sell a box of dog shit if it had the Atari logo on it. Same with the controllers designed by accountants to be as cheap as possible to produce quality be damned. The kiddies would not know the difference so screw them. 4) My guess is the marketing of the 5200 was terrible and people didn't understand that the 5200 was different from and more powerful than the 2600. 5) Hardware wise the 5200 competed well against the intellivision, but was curb stomped by Coleco. Not to mention, the pack in of the 5200 was breakout which looked like just another 2600 game. Coleco packed-in Donkey Kong, which was hugely popular at the time and it looked nearly as good as the arcade version. I'm curious to know what other folks have to say. Should be interesting and enlighting.

Just wanted to say: I never heard of the Astrocade until recently but it seems quite awesome. VERY powerful for it's time, great controllers, and in my opinion it's the best looking game console out there. If it wasn't so difficult and expensive to get a working console and games to go with it, I would get one in a heartbeat. That said, emulation is the only way I'll be able to play the system and resources such as ballyalley are much appreciated. Even though I'll probably never own quite a few obscure old video game consoles, it's nice to have a way to get a taste of what they are all about.