Technical CV vs 5200

[Gorf]

The Maria Chip is by far more flexible than the VDC of the CV.

The display lists allow for a wide variety of hardware assited

graphics.

 

The Maria's only problem is the lack of RAM. The other issue

with the 7800 is the sound. Stock out of the box, the CV and 7800

are closer in comparision. Add a POKEY and RAM on the 7800 cart

and it will hurt the CV pretty good. Extra Ram on a CV cart will

only make the game more involed but wont do much to assist

the VDC.

 

The one thing Atari has ALWAYS had over the competition is much

crisper cleaner video. Even 2600 games when written properly, like

activisions games for instance, show just how clean and crisp the

video is. Coleco is decent video but not as clean.

 

I think the Magnavox units video quality is probably the ONLY sysetm with

as high a quality in video.

 

Graphically, the Sally/Maria can directly access anything in the system and

does not need to write to ports before sending data. However, it does have

to steal cycles from the Sally.

 

The i/o mapped nature of the CV's graphics chip slows it down considerably.

If they memory mapped just the 16k screen ram, it would have been much

more efficient, especially with the Z-80 block move instructions.

[CV Gus]

Well, last week I went over those old magazines from 1982, 1983, and 1984, the only conclusion I can draw is that the 7800, which must've been in the works at least in 1983, was intended to go up against the CV. It was not supposed to go up against the NES, since again, there was absolutely no mention of it anywhere. Remember, Nintendo originally approached Atari to market it here in America, so Atari could not have thought much of it back when the 7800 was supposed to have been released, even if they had known of it beyond a mere abstract.

 

The whole way Atari dealt with the 5200 and 7800 was doomed to failure. Once they released to 5200 to match the sudden threat of the CV, they sealed their own fates: either stay with the 5200 until the 7800 became pretty pointless, or release the 7800 and dump the 5200 (angering Atari owners- bad for business).

 

Look at games like Robotron: 2084, Ms. Pac-Man, and Centipede- for crying out loud, Ms. Pac-Man and Robotron had only been released for the 5200 in 1983, and now they launch the 7800, dumping the 5200, with the same games in 1984 that weren't THAT much better?

 

If the 5200 was so much better, why wasn't this reflected in the games? Why wouldn't Atari have just stuck with the 5200, instead of trying to match a third-generation CV with a fourth-generation system? Why were Pac-Man, Joust, Dig-Dug, and Galaxian obviously better? Who does that for an inferior rival system?

[slampam]

Reclining on the plot of Maria...

So this is how it's done.

[Gorf]

If the 5200 was so much better, why wasn't this reflected in the games? Why wouldn't Atari have just stuck with the 5200, instead of trying to match a third-generation CV with a fourth-generation system? Why were Pac-Man, Joust, Dig-Dug, and Galaxian obviously better? Who does that for an inferior rival system?

 

 

Oh you're right! Atari never made bad decisions.

 

The first bad one was making the 5200 an A8 based machine. It should have leapfrogged that technology.

At very least the 5200 should have added another sprite chip with HW scrolling.

 

At that time, I bought a CV instead. Why? Those controllers truly pissed me off and I already had an 8

bit with a good deal of the games at the 5200 release anyway.

Edited March 14, 2009 by Gorf

[Gorf]

Reclining on the plot of Maria...

So this is how it's done.

 

 

What ever is that screen image in your avatar of? Do tell! Doooo tell!

[slampam]

Reclining on the plot of Maria...

So this is how it's done.

 

 

What ever is that screen image in your avatar of? Do tell! Doooo tell!

Nothing ominous. Killer Shark

[Gorf]

Reclining on the plot of Maria...

So this is how it's done.

 

 

What ever is that screen image in your avatar of? Do tell! Doooo tell!

Nothing ominous. Killer Shark

 

 

I dont believe I've ever seen that. Most interesting. Thanx for the link!

[CV Gus]

If the 5200 was so much better, why wasn't this reflected in the games? Why wouldn't Atari have just stuck with the 5200, instead of trying to match a third-generation CV with a fourth-generation system? Why were Pac-Man, Joust, Dig-Dug, and Galaxian obviously better? Who does that for an inferior rival system?

 

 

Oh you're right! Atari never made bad decisions.

 

The first bad one was making the 5200 an A8 based machine. It should have leapfrogged that technology.

At very least the 5200 should have added another sprite chip with HW scrolling.

 

At that time, I bought a CV instead. Why? Those controllers truly pissed me off and I already had an 8

bit with a good deal of the games at the 5200 release anyway.

 

 

Well, bad decisions are one thing, but THIS? Nothing they did at this point really added up, unless Atari was so hopelessly disorganized that one section had no idea what the others were doing. They never had a unified plan. Even in a small company, this is bad; for a company as big as Atari back then, this is a recipe for sure-fire failure of massive proportions!

 

Think about it- no matter what they did, something had to go down- for the count. Release the 7800? Betray the 5200 owners, and get a bad reputation for loyalty.

 

Stick with the 5200? So much for the 7800, then.

 

Release the Atarisoft CV games? They were better than the 5200 versions (not good, since Joust, Pac-Man, and Dig-Dug were popular games), so the CV would've sold better yet. Don't release them? A lot of time, money, and effort gone.

 

Quite frankly, I'm beginning to believe in that rumor about how the 7800 was supposed to have been Atari's next system, but the 1982 release of the CV forced them to quickly come up with something to go against it- which is why the 5200 was "an Atari 400 without a keyboard." It might also explain why a 1984 system was compatable with the 2600, but not a 1982 system.

 

Overall, I prefer the 5200 to the 7800.

[ApolloBoy]

Well, bad decisions are one thing, but THIS? Nothing they did at this point really added up, unless Atari was so hopelessly disorganized that one section had no idea what the others were doing. They never had a unified plan. Even in a small company, this is bad; for a company as big as Atari back then, this is a recipe for sure-fire failure of massive proportions!

 

Think about it- no matter what they did, something had to go down- for the count. Release the 7800? Betray the 5200 owners, and get a bad reputation for loyalty.

 

Stick with the 5200? So much for the 7800, then.

 

Release the Atarisoft CV games? They were better than the 5200 versions (not good, since Joust, Pac-Man, and Dig-Dug were popular games), so the CV would've sold better yet. Don't release them? A lot of time, money, and effort gone.

 

Quite frankly, I'm beginning to believe in that rumor about how the 7800 was supposed to have been Atari's next system, but the 1982 release of the CV forced them to quickly come up with something to go against it- which is why the 5200 was "an Atari 400 without a keyboard." It might also explain why a 1984 system was compatable with the 2600, but not a 1982 system.

 

Overall, I prefer the 5200 to the 7800.

 

[slampam]

If the 5200 had been a XEGS there’d be no issues to complain about – except maybe pastel buttons.

 

I’m surprised this Atarisoft c64 Joust is still missing.

[Ransom]

Given the video game situation in 1982, I can see putting the 5200 out there. It's an awesome-looking system, and the controllers are a large step up from the competition (two buttons vs. the 2600's one; a joystick vs. the Intellivision's disc; Start, Pause, and Reset on the controller). Plus they have an almost-ready-made library of games for it, and plenty of people to call on who can make great games for it immediately with almost no learning curve.

 

The 7800 on the other hand has worse controllers (more reliable, but more painful to use), and its Achilles heel: sound. Without a Pokey in every cart, it falls down badly. On the other hand, it can move lots of detailed objects very smoothly.

 

IMO, though, the 5200 (with digital joystick and optional trak-ball add-on) should have been the system for 1980. The 7800 (with improved sound & controllers) should have been the system for 1984.

 

In 1980, they could have gotten away with the 5200 not being backward-compatible with the VCS. It just wasn't that popular before Space Invaders came out. If they'd kept the A-list titles on the 5200 and continued with basic games for the VCS, I think it would have worked out fine. No one would have ever expected more from the VCS.

 

And then once the 5200 had run its course, they could have released the 7800 with either the gamepad style controllers or something more like the Wico Bat with two buttons.

 

To get back to the subject, the 5200's technical merits make it a more elegant system. But the CV more easily produces far more detailed and colorful output. In skilled hands, either can do amazing things. But with the CV has the edge for the Wow factor.

Edited March 17, 2009 by Ransom

[DracIsBack]

Quite frankly, I'm beginning to believe in that rumor about how the 7800 was supposed to have been Atari's next system,

 

Umm ... what rumour? More like your personal theory

 

How about downloading this link and listening to it from beginning to end if you want to know about the history of the 7800. Go to the source: the guys who made the machine.

 

http://www.applefritter.com/mp3/vcf2004/atari.mp3

[Gorf]

If the 5200 was so much better, why wasn't this reflected in the games? Why wouldn't Atari have just stuck with the 5200, instead of trying to match a third-generation CV with a fourth-generation system? Why were Pac-Man, Joust, Dig-Dug, and Galaxian obviously better? Who does that for an inferior rival system?

 

 

Oh you're right! Atari never made bad decisions.

 

The first bad one was making the 5200 an A8 based machine. It should have leapfrogged that technology.

At very least the 5200 should have added another sprite chip with HW scrolling.

 

At that time, I bought a CV instead. Why? Those controllers truly pissed me off and I already had an 8

bit with a good deal of the games at the 5200 release anyway.

 

 

Well, bad decisions are one thing, but THIS? Nothing they did at this point really added up, unless Atari was so hopelessly disorganized that one section had no idea what the others were doing. They never had a unified plan. Even in a small company, this is bad; for a company as big as Atari back then, this is a recipe for sure-fire failure of massive proportions!

 

Think about it- no matter what they did, something had to go down- for the count. Release the 7800? Betray the 5200 owners, and get a bad reputation for loyalty.

 

Stick with the 5200? So much for the 7800, then.

 

Release the Atarisoft CV games? They were better than the 5200 versions (not good, since Joust, Pac-Man, and Dig-Dug were popular games), so the CV would've sold better yet. Don't release them? A lot of time, money, and effort gone.

 

Quite frankly, I'm beginning to believe in that rumor about how the 7800 was supposed to have been Atari's next system, but the 1982 release of the CV forced them to quickly come up with something to go against it- which is why the 5200 was "an Atari 400 without a keyboard." It might also explain why a 1984 system was compatable with the 2600, but not a 1982 system.

 

Overall, I prefer the 5200 to the 7800.

 

The 7800 had loads more potential. Loads more.

[CV Gus]

But did it, really? From what I can sort out from Vigo's comments about the 7800, I'm not all that sure that it was really THAT much better than the CV or 5200. It would be interesting for an Opcode and his 5200 equal to tell us what the relative abilities actually were to the 7800.

 

For example, Desert Falcon. We know about the choppy CV scrolling for Zaxxon, but if you designed the screens so no more than two colors (it would still look good) ever entered a space-line, wouldn't you have a smooth scrolling CV version? Maybe the enemies wouldn't be as colorful, but would that matter? And what kind of a version could the 5200 handle?

 

By the way- Upon checking the 5200 version of Ms. Pac-Man, I noticed that the maze colors did not seem to match those of the arcade version at all, in two of the mazes, at least. But they were multi-colored. Why was this, a limitation of the 5200? I understand the mazes in the CV version, but not here.

 

Still, we all can agree on one thing- with the Tramiels running things, the 7800 never had a chance. Hell, they would've doomed the NES.

[philipj]

I think if Atari had gone back to the drawing boards with the 7800, especially with the Maria, the 7800 may have had a fighting chance. Nintendo graphics chip the "PPU or Picture Processing Unit" had 16kb of RAM to do all sorts of graphical stuff... That was the advantage the NES had over the 7800, however the Maria was/is much faster then the Nintendo PPU. Another thing was the difference between the 6502 chips for both systems; the NES CPU was the full 6502 processor in comparison to the 7800 TIA. I just found it pretty facinating to know that the 7800 was that close to being that much more graphically powerful over the NES. Don't mean to go off topic here... Just thought I'd throw it out there.

[kenfused]

I think the only real advantage the CV has over the 5200 is the ability to have a higher color resolution.

 

I think the only real advantage the CV has over the 7800 is sound (w/o adding it to a cart). Maybe you could argue resolution here a little since there is probably some situations the CV could win.

 

I am not going to argue controllers since there are various third party solutions for all the machines.

 

--Ken

[DracIsBack]

But did it, really? From what I can sort out from Vigo's comments about the 7800, I'm not all that sure that it was really THAT much better than the CV or 5200.

 

Vigo has outlined many times the specific ways in which the 7800 is better than the Colecovision on a technical level. You just refuse to listen.

 

For example, Desert Falcon. We know about the choppy CV scrolling for Zaxxon, but if you designed the screens so no more than two colors (it would still look good) ever entered a space-line, wouldn't you have a smooth scrolling CV version? Maybe the enemies wouldn't be as colorful, but would that matter? And what kind of a version could the 5200 handle?

 

There's also the issue of the number of enemies in conjunction with those other items.

 

As for the 5200, there is an 8bit version out there already. Not exactly the pinnacle of programming, but do a little research.

 

And again, who cares about a launch title? (Desert Falcon came out in 1987 but was in works in 1984 as Sphinx - listen to the Mp3 posted and you'd know)

 

Let's talk about the version of SCRAPYARD DOG, ALIEN BRIGADE, TOWER TOPPLER and SIRIUS that the Colecovision could do.

 

Still, we all can agree on one thing- with the Tramiels running things, the 7800 never had a chance. Hell, they would've doomed the NES.

 

That's because they didn't see Atari as a "game" company. They wanted to make computers and games funded computers.

[CV Gus]

Oh, you're wrong there- I do listen, but what he mostly described was how they do things differently- which is not the same as inferior or superior.

[DracIsBack]

Oh, you're wrong there- I do listen, but what he mostly described was how they do things differently- which is not the same as inferior or superior.

 

Dude, there is hardly any such thing as "unilaterally" superior within generations.

 

Vigo most definitely went into details on how they did things differently. He also spent a lot of time on areas where X system was inferior to Y system and where X system was superior to Y system.

 

Go back and read.

[BSA Starfire]

One wonders how much faith Atari had in the 5200 as it never even got an international launch at the height of the videogame boom. anyone know the thinking behind no PAL release for the 5200? To the best of my knowledge it's the only major system from Atari never to see the light of day in the UK.

Best regards,

Chris

[HARMIK]

I believe thay were working on it and a prototype may exist, I just run an NTSC one now as I have with most my systems. No boarders and about 20% faster.

[Gorf]

But did it, really? From what I can sort out from Vigo's comments about the 7800.

 

Yes it did, really. Sound chip and # of titles I'll give you.

 

However, Sound and titles are overcome via cart pokey and development.

 

The Maria chip is definitely superior in many ways. Its much more flexible.

 

Sprites:

 

7800:

64+( I believe I read somewhere, Dan Boris saying you can get many more than this.)

4 pixels all the way up to 256 pixels wide and however high(with limits of course).

No sprites per line limit(thoretically but many more than CV allows.)

1,2,4 bit per pixel color.

Inderect mode for character and text based graphics.

 

CV:

32 max

8x8 and 16x 16

4 to a line max.

one color

Text buffer mode.

 

7800 sprites are by far more flexible in the size, shape and colors

and the ability to use them as a back buffer, along side the other

sprites used as foreground sprites.

 

If Atari had put a pokey and 16k ram in the 7800, we would not be having this conversation.

16k ram would afford you a backdrop buffer, many sprites and an entire character mode

layer all on the same screen.

 

Still, we all can agree on one thing- with the Tramiels running things, the 7800 never had a chance. Hell, they would've doomed the NES.

 

They had a chance, but like most chances they had, they blew it. Had the 7800 been released when it was ready,

you may not have NES or Sega, at least not on the level they managed to attain. The CV is a fantastic unit and I

bought it OVER the 5200 at the time. Had the 7800 been released, I would not have given the CV a second look.

 

NES's vid chip has some advantage but the 7800 is much crisper on the output and not nearly the flicker fest that the PPu

is.

 

Tramiels were penny pinchers and hated video games.

Atari was once friendly with Nintendo and had Mario games for license.

 

Had the Tramiels knew what they were doing, Atari would have dominated

in the 80's. Instead of listening to the guy behind the 7800, they fire him.

 

The Tramiels destroyed Atari's game legacy. Be happy as a CV fan, otherwise

things could have been very different.

Edited March 19, 2009 by Gorf

[Gorf]

I think if Atari had gone back to the drawing boards with the 7800, especially with the Maria, the 7800 may have had a fighting chance. Nintendo graphics chip the "PPU or Picture Processing Unit" had 16kb of RAM to do all sorts of graphical stuff... That was the advantage the NES had over the 7800, however the Maria was/is much faster then the Nintendo PPU. Another thing was the difference between the 6502 chips for both systems; the NES CPU was the full 6502 processor in comparison to the 7800 TIA. I just found it pretty facinating to know that the 7800 was that close to being that much more graphically powerful over the NES. Don't mean to go off topic here... Just thought I'd throw it out there.

 

 

The Sally is a FULL 6502, it just has an additional HALT line for distinguising between MARIA and ROM reads? Soemthing like that.

The 7800's TIA is a peripheral chip, not a processor.

 

You can add RAM to Maria and open up a lot of possibilities for Maria that 4k cant offer.

[CV Gus]

Well, I never did say that the CV pounds the 7800- I merely said that, compared to the CV or 5200, the 7800 did not seem to be that much better.

 

For example, I know that no way can the CV give you an equally good version of Desert Falcon- but it probably can give you a good enough one, if the 2-color/space/line limitation was observed. I'd guess the same for the 5200, too. And not-as-colorful enemies.

 

The problem is, while- thanks to Opcode- we are learning more about what a CV can do, there is no such programmer for the 7800. The NES had its limits pushed to the fullest (Japanese way), but not the 7800.

 

And therein lies the problem I'm having here with all of this.

 

For example, scrolling. Just which system could do it better? Tower Toppler for the 7800 seemed as good as anything I've seen on the NES. Could Sirius have looked better, just as CV Burgertime did not have to have so much flickering? Was it system limitation, or programmer (or time, or budget) limitation?

 

On-screen movement? Judging by the flickering in Bubble Bobble for the NES, probably the 7800 (fairly simple playfield).

 

But would that have changed on a complex background? Maybe the 7800 could do a better version of Asteroids or Space Duel (simple background), but not so a game like Lifeforce?

 

You can list how they do things differently (the 7800 "everything is an object"), but for the final result, which comes out on top? If you list the color and resolution of the CV and 5200 individually, the 5200 comes out `way ahead, until you combine those features- then, much of that advantage is lost. So it's not just individual attributes, it's a combination in many cases.

If one merely goes by the 4-sprite/line limit of the CV, for example, then one can only conclude that a version of Ms. Pac-Man, with all multi-colored characters, would have an intolerable amount of flickering and disappearances. But we all know that this is NOT the case, because the CV has speed to make up for most of this.

 

I myself did not believe the kind of scrolling in Matt Patrol. If the green hills were "molded" to look like the Lunar City, but were never higher than the hills were, could that have worked? If far away enough from the edges, could more colors have been used? Just how good a version could it have been? Stagger the sprites on two of the UFOs, and you'd not have any more flickering.

 

 

In other words, in any comparison, one system may have it over the other, until another factor is required (complex background?), in which case the advantage is lost. But which is it?

 

 

Incidently- was that version of Xevious the best a 5200 can do? Surely not!

[DracIsBack]

Nintendo graphics chip the "PPU or Picture Processing Unit" had 16kb of RAM to do all sorts of graphical stuff.

 

You sure the NES has that much memory? I thought it was more like 2K ram + 2K video ram.