Atari 5200 vs. CelecoVision

[DracIsBack]

"All I have to do is play the darn game to see which system is better."

"the best version is on the Starpath Supercharger."

"Galaxian is better on ColecoVision"

"Centipede is better on the 5200"

" to answer the question in the original post the ColecoVision is the better console."

 

Agree that insulting each other is dumb. Problem is that this thread has drifted from arguments over technical capabilities into a round of "my personal subjective opinion is more valid (and accurate) than your personal subjective opinion".

 

Number one way to fuel the flames

[atariksi]

Well, since we have entered the world of personal opinion, I can say that 160 pixels horizontally isn’t and hasn't been "high res" since the 70s after Space Invaders came out...

 

Another observation on the world of personal opinion: Coleco fanboys are just as adamant as Commodore fanboys, when it comes to invading ATARIage to diss on Ataris. Amazing that the opposite doesn't happen. Is there no "Coleco Age?" (Why not? No large following like Atari? Why??) Do Atari users not care about Coleco? Both? Speculation?

 

Don't be such a crybaby. The 5200 fanboys here started with the whole "the 5200 is in another league" thing, which isn't true.

...

It's in another league for some things like graphics and timing. There were ZERO home computers or game consoles in 1970s that had 128 colors. There were ZERO 8-bit computer in early 1980s (8-bit era) that offered capability of 16 shades per color. There was this PGA card for PC that was thousands of dollars and not standard and only this card offered 16 shades per color.

 

>The ColecoVision has many advantages and some disadvantages too.

 

No, Colecovision has many disadvantages and perhaps some advantages.

 

>About Ataris, actually I am a big fan, my collection of 2600 and 8-bit computers is quite large.

 

You are not a big fan of Atari since you make a FALSE claim:

 

>And while I like the 8-bits because they were very capable, flexible and sexy machines, the truth is that by 1982 they were kind of outdated, especially as game machines. Antic with its DLs simply isn’t the most adequate for games, as isn’t the 7800’s Maria.

 

If you go by truth, you will state "The amazing thing is Atari is better than Colecovision although it came out many years before." Atari 5200 is based on 1979 technology which even after many years Colecovision could not even equal. Let me see how it became "outdated":

 

Colecovision decided that 256 colors were outdated and replaced them with 16.

Colecovision decided that it can't spend time doing 320*192 and 160*192 so they made some hybrid 256*192.

Colecovision decided that having so many graphics and text modes in hardware wasn't worth it as we can just double CPU speed.

Colecovision decided collision detection hardware (60-bits) wasn't worth it as we can just double CPU speed.

Colecovision decided that we will multiplex sprites in hardware and call it 32-sprites although it's essentially less 4players/4missiles per scanline.

etc.

etc.

 

>...Finally, I don't know what your problem with the Commodore fanboys is, but if it is because of them saying the C64 is more powerful than the A8, I must agree with them.

 

Now you are REALLY proving you are an Atari fan. Atari fans at least will go through the trouble of finding out the facts rather than blindly side with Commodore 64 side. You can read about C64 vs. Atari in another thread. Suffice to say, you are mistaken in both cases (claiming Colecovision and C64 superiority)

 

>And I find it amazing a multi-billion dollar company couldn’t create an updated version of their 8-bit platform. Almost 10 years and several lines later (XL, XE, XGS) and it was still the same damn machine. Just check how much the competing computer lines advanced in the same period of time…

 

Yeah, things they should have improved like CGA graphics compare well with Colecovision and C64 whereas Atari 8-bit graphics require a VGA card to display.

[opcode]

To the disappointment of some and glee of others, I am kind of busy today, so not a lot of free time for AtariAge...

 

I disagree. The 8-bit Atari was a fine game machine years before the Colecovision, and years after Coleco died. From 1982 to 1985, some of the best games on the Atari XL/XE came out. I mean, Donkey Kong wasn't even released until 1983, although I'd expect you to say the excellent A8 version is inferior to the Coleco 3-screen version.

 

Do you mean that "Donkey Kong with cavities" version in 5 colors? Do you realize that in 83 DK for the Famicom was released in Japan. Now that's a very close port. I will concede that the CV version isn't that great either (but at least Mario is recognizable). Now calling the A800 version the best DK ever is too much a stretch... Actually the best version is in the works, to make companion to the best versions of Space Invaders (I and II), Pac-Man and Ms Pac-Man available on classic systems.

 

About AtariAge, as far as I know it is open to the whole classic community.

 

Indeed, it is. However, when fanboys of competing systems repeatedly come to diss Ataris on Atariage, it's about as brilliant as racists going to the NAACP site and dissing on the clientele there. One must ask the underlying questions: "Why?" and "What do you expect?"

 

How rude of me.... Even though this thread is titled 5200 vs. ColecoVision, I am supposed to come here just to concede that the 5200 is indeed better, because after all this is an Atari forum.... Atari fanboys are such crybabies… Atari800 better than C64. Sure, we know very well who is right here, there are hundreds of games out there to prove that…

About racism, better ask your friend atarian63, aka “if it isn’t in the US, it isn’t relevant”….

 

And atariksi, I am still waiting for the games with 23 colors/scanline….

 

Seriously, I had a great time here, even with all the Atari fanboys. I love all of you guys, we are all in the same boat, trying to do the best impression of our long dead machines. I think we have done a pretty fine job...

[opcode]

Geez, atariksi, your last post isn't even worth replying. You have a serious delusional disorder, pal... Did you take your pill today? But you are right, A800 is the most advanced thing ever. Better than CV, C64, NES, SMS, Genesis, SNES, PS, you name it. I am not even sure if the XB720/PS4 are going to be able to beat it.

[atariksi]

Geez, atariksi, your last post isn't even worth replying. You have a serious delusional disorder, pal... Did you take your pill today? But you are right, A800 is the most advanced thing ever. Better than CV, C64, NES, SMS, Genesis, SNES, PS, you name it. I am not even sure if the XB720/PS4 are going to be able to beat it.

 

If you can't reply logically don't bother. I already see you twisted things around. I only mentioned CV and C64 in my arguments where you are definitely mistaken. And you repeating 5-color mode isn't helping your case of gross ignorance of Atari capabilities.

Edited June 18, 2009 by atariksi

[atariksi]

To the disappointment of some and glee of others, I am kind of busy today, so not a lot of free time for AtariAge...

...

Just had free time to insult people without addressing the points. Anyone can insult-- you don't need knowledge of computers to do so.

 

>Do you mean that "Donkey Kong with cavities" version in 5 colors?

 

Yeah, the one that beats the CV which you can't accept despite claiming that you are an Atari fan.

 

>I will concede that the CV version isn't that great either (but at least Mario is recognizable).

 

A8 version is better. We don't care about other systems unless you just want to try to belittle Atari again rather than stick to your MSX/CV comparisons.

 

>Now calling the A800 version the best DK ever is too much a stretch... Actually the best version is in the works, to make companion to the best versions of Space Invaders (I and II), Pac-Man and Ms Pac-Man available on classic systems.

 

Comparing with nonexistent things is sign of being mentally sick.

 

>How rude of me.... Even though this thread is titled 5200 vs. ColecoVision, I am supposed to come here just to concede that the 5200 is indeed better, because after all this is an Atari forum....

 

But you already twisted things around into 5200 vs. NES/MSB/Playstation/etc. Why don't you be consistent? If CV can't beat it then admit it rather than finding some other system to compare with especially if product is nonexistent.

 

>Atari fanboys are such crybabies… Atari800 better than C64. Sure, we know very well who is right here, there are hundreds of games out there to prove that…

 

Once again, we are comparing which machine is superior hardware-- go read the thread in A8 forum. You are so lost in your delusions. You think just seeing some games determines which machine has superior hardware, yet compare DK with a nonexistent version. You must be a real Atari fan who can do anything to belittle Atari.

 

>And atariksi, I am still waiting for the games with 23 colors/scanline….

 

I'm waiting for you to admit that Atari hardware can handle 23 colors/scanline rather than repeating your bullcrap that's only 5.

 

>Seriously, I had a great time here, even with all the Atari fanboys. I

 

Prove it that it all Atari fanboys. That's your mental speculation. You have no understanding of C64 nor A8 hardware. You just go by some limited games you may have seen or played. Go learn something about the systems before you make your remarks.

 

>I love all of you guys, we are all in the same boat, trying to do the best impression of our long dead machines. I think we have done a pretty fine job...

 

Another statement blurted out from the top of your head without any evidence. My Atari is still useful to me for many things besides games. Speak for yourself-- just admit for YOU Colecovision and Atari are long dead and perhaps we can atleast credit you for being honest.

[opcode]

This bit is technical so worth replying..

 

Colecovision decided that 256 colors were outdated and replaced them with 16.

I will concede the palette is fixed, but in some cases it is still more flexible, like allowing us to have 16 colors/scanline in 256 pixels. BTW, still waiting for the 23 colors/scanline games...

 

Colecovision decided that it can't spend time doing 320*192 and 160*192 so they made some hybrid 256*192.

Sigh… what can I say? NES used 256, SMS used 256, almost all arcades from the time used 256. And remember, your 320 is technically unusable for games because of the 1 1/2 color limitation..

 

Colecovision decided that having so many graphics and text modes in hardware wasn't worth it as we can just double CPU speed.

What are you taking about? Graphics II offers all the features, we don't need to mix modes.

 

Colecovision decided collision detection hardware (60-bits) wasn't worth it as we can just double CPU speed.

First, hardware collision detection is useful only if you have 4 or 5 sprites, as it is the case with the A800. Try to do that with 32 sprites. You would need a lot of bits to have all possible collision combinations. Secondly, do you know any arcade hardware that has it? NES? SMS? Genesis? SNES? No... Maybe it's because they are all inferiors....

Actually your comment here shows that you have never programmed a game in your life. Hardware detection isn't useful simply because for most games collision doesn't happen until sprites are several pixels overlapped, that is, most games don’t want collision to happen with minor contact, and that was a DESIGN decision…

 

Colecovision decided that we will multiplex sprites in hardware and call it 32-sprites although it's essentially less 4players/4missiles per scanline.

Holly ignorance, Batman... Lets see, Atari800: 4 sprites 8pixel wide, 4 sprites 2pixel wide (two freaking pixels!). Total 40 pixels horizontally. No vertical sprite placement registers, must be done by software.

TMS9918: 32 sprites, 4 per scanline. 16pixels wide, total 64 pixels horizontally.... Vertical and horizontal sprite placement registers.

 

etc.

 

etc.

Does “etc. etc” mean "I cannot come with anything else, so I just pretend that there is more"?

[Crazyace]

But you could put ram in and bankswitch - so all of your screenshots could be reproduced on the CV.

The TMS9918 has its own VRAM, it doesn't rely on system RAM, so you don't need any more than 1kB of system RAM to produce the graphics above. Of course system RAM can help with game logic.

I was thinking about system ram on cartridge - ( I should have said game rather than screenshot, sorry! )

 

The gremlins game actually shows a strength - using a high res bitmap ( in 4 colours ) along with the multi colour sprites for the main player it has a lot of detail with no flickering

Well, since we have entered the world of personal opinion, I can say that 160 pixels horizontally isn’t and hasn't been "high res" since the 70s after Space Invaders came out...

256 pixels is the biggest advantage of the 9918 over the Atari machines. I notice ( and really detest ) flickering much more than the resolution differences myself.

When I saw DK first on the CV I really envied it, as it looked so much more colourful compared to the a8 version. But in the end I preferred playing the a8 version.

[Bryan]

atariksi is arguing over here now? Why don't you guys keep him here for a while.

[opcode]

>Now calling the A800 version the best DK ever is too much a stretch... Actually the best version is in the works, to make companion to the best versions of Space Invaders (I and II), Pac-Man and Ms Pac-Man available on classic systems.

 

Comparing with nonexistent things is sign of being mentally sick.

 

Actually Pac-Man Collection and Space Invaders Collection are quite real, just ask the CV users here.

DK is in the works, as I indicated. Since it uses arcade code, and it is already partially playable, I think it's pretty safe for me to come here and say that no other version for a classic system can match it...

[opcode]

atariksi is arguing over here now? Why don't you guys keep him here for a while.

 

Hi Bry!

 

Does that mean I have been loosing my time?

[CARTRIDGE STEALER]

didnt coleco beat atari to the punch when releasing thier first system? I think so!

 

I think you self-contradicted your "best friend" who was claiming Atari is outdated since A5200 is essentially Atari 400 from 1979.

 

no, I was speaking in general. coleco bought out the first system in 76. atari was a year later.

[atariksi]

This bit is technical so worth replying..

...

I'm glad you agree your first reply wasn't technical but just an insult.

 

Colecovision decided that 256 colors were outdated and replaced them with 16.

>I will concede the palette is fixed, but in some cases it is still more flexible, like allowing us to have 16 colors/scanline in 256 pixels. BTW, still waiting for the 23 colors/scanline games...

 

Atari supports 23 colors/scanline w/o DLIs. You can see some pictures in the ATari vs. C64 forum if you don't believe me. I am arguing Atari is superior hardware not make a game. I can make a game though-- just more into applications that use 23 colors/scanline or more currently.

 

Colecovision decided that it can't spend time doing 320*192 and 160*192 so they made some hybrid 256*192.

>Sigh… what can I say? NES used 256, SMS used 256, almost all arcades from the time used 256. And remember, your 320 is technically unusable for games because of the 1 1/2 color limitation..

 

You stated the same point already and it was refuted. You can have sprite underlays and DLIs to change colors. See this screen shot of 320*200 mode and tell me it's 1.5 colors:

 

http://www.atariage.com/forums/index.php?a...t&id=130165

 

Colecovision decided that having so many graphics and text modes in hardware wasn't worth it as we can just double CPU speed.

>What are you taking about? Graphics II offers all the features, we don't need to mix modes.

 

Hello? Perhaps, this is the reason you think C64 is superior to Atari. Having one graphics mode that you can emulate other modes on is not the same as having those other modes done by hardware especially if your mode is addressed nonlinearly. CPU cycles can be costly for implementing other graphics modes in software. I don't want to know your opinion as to which modes you find useful-- just overall for any particular purpose Atari has more graphics modes in hardware.

 

Colecovision decided collision detection hardware (60-bits) wasn't worth it as we can just double CPU speed.

>First, hardware collision detection is useful only if you have 4 or 5 sprites, as it is the case with the A800. Try to do that with 32 sprites.

 

Bullcrap. Atari does collision detection for 8 sprite objects and 4 playfields. The more the bits supported the less the software has to do.

 

>No... Maybe it's because they are all inferiors....

 

You can't follow simple logic-- that's your problem.

 

>Actually your comment here shows that you have never programmed a game in your life. Hardware detection isn't useful simply because for most games collision doesn't happen until sprites are several pixels overlapped, that is, most games don’t want collision to happen with minor contact, and that was a DESIGN decision…

 

I have programmed games on various systems so you are wrong. The lame argument again: "it isn't useful". Sure it's useful-- look at all the Atari games that use it. And even if you need to go a few pixels deep, you can still use it and then do compare.

 

Colecovision decided that we will multiplex sprites in hardware and call it 32-sprites although it's essentially less 4players/4missiles per scanline.

>Holly ignorance, Batman... Lets see, Atari800: 4 sprites 8pixel wide, 4 sprites 2pixel wide (two freaking pixels!). Total 40 pixels horizontally. No vertical sprite placement registers, must be done by software.

TMS9918: 32 sprites, 4 per scanline. 16pixels wide, total 64 pixels horizontally.... Vertical and horizontal sprite placement registers.

 

You are dumb. You need to look at sprite coverage not just X-axis. And even for X-axis, you can replicate the sprites, zoom the sprites, etc. Be consistent now-- here you are claiming you have vertical placement registers but above you are willing to spend all the CPU cycles you need to emulate other graphics modes or do collision detection.

 

etc.

 

etc.

>Does “etc. etc” mean "I cannot come with anything else, so I just pretend that there is more"?

 

No, that means I predicted that you won't even agree with these obvious points so it's a moot point discussing other points (which I haven't listed yet).

[ApolloBoy]

didnt coleco beat atari to the punch when releasing thier first system? I think so!

 

I think you self-contradicted your "best friend" who was claiming Atari is outdated since A5200 is essentially Atari 400 from 1979.

 

no, I was speaking in general. coleco bought out the first system in 76. atari was a year later.

Um, no. The Telstar Arcade (which I presume is what you're thinking of) was released in 1978, about a year after the 2600.

[Bryan]

You are dumb. You need to look at sprite coverage not just X-axis. And even for X-axis, you can replicate the sprites, zoom the sprites, etc. Be consistent now-- here you are claiming you have vertical placement registers but above you are willing to spend all the CPU cycles you need to emulate other graphics modes or do collision detection.

You're calling one of the most brilliant coders on AtariAge dumb? The day people here value hypothetical performance statistics over proven, professional quality code is the day your opinion will be worth half of his.

Edited June 18, 2009 by Bryan

[atariksi]

You are dumb. You need to look at sprite coverage not just X-axis. And even for X-axis, you can replicate the sprites, zoom the sprites, etc. Be consistent now-- here you are claiming you have vertical placement registers but above you are willing to spend all the CPU cycles you need to emulate other graphics modes or do collision detection.

You're calling one of the most brilliant coders on AtariAge dumb? The day people here value hypothetical performance statistics over proven, professional quality code is the day your opinion will be worth half of his.

 

You forgot to read all the insults he has posted against me on this thread. And I am backing up my word "dumb" unlike him. He's just making false accusations. He may be a programmer on AtariAge and he also claims to be an Atari fan, but his words speak volumes in how biased he is in his analysis of the two systems.

[opcode]

You forgot to read all the insults he has posted against me on this thread. And I am backing up my word "dumb" unlike him. He's just making false accusations. He may be a programmer on AtariAge and he also claims to be an Atari fan, but his words speak volumes in how biased he is in his analysis of the two systems.

 

I am still waiting for your 5200 game with 23 colors/scanline...

[CARTRIDGE STEALER]

didnt coleco beat atari to the punch when releasing thier first system? I think so!

 

I think you self-contradicted your "best friend" who was claiming Atari is outdated since A5200 is essentially Atari 400 from 1979.

 

no, I was speaking in general. coleco bought out the first system in 76. atari was a year later.

Um, no. The Telstar Arcade (which I presume is what you're thinking of) was released in 1978, about a year after the 2600.

 

ok, Im wrong and youre wrong. telestar arcade was released in 77. I had one, I still have the games.

[atarian63]

To the disappointment of some and glee of others, I am kind of busy today, so not a lot of free time for AtariAge...

 

I disagree. The 8-bit Atari was a fine game machine years before the Colecovision, and years after Coleco died. From 1982 to 1985, some of the best games on the Atari XL/XE came out. I mean, Donkey Kong wasn't even released until 1983, although I'd expect you to say the excellent A8 version is inferior to the Coleco 3-screen version.

 

Do you mean that "Donkey Kong with cavities" version in 5 colors? Do you realize that in 83 DK for the Famicom was released in Japan. Now that's a very close port. I will concede that the CV version isn't that great either (but at least Mario is recognizable). Now calling the A800 version the best DK ever is too much a stretch... Actually the best version is in the works, to make companion to the best versions of Space Invaders (I and II), Pac-Man and Ms Pac-Man available on classic systems.

 

About AtariAge, as far as I know it is open to the whole classic community.

 

Indeed, it is. However, when fanboys of competing systems repeatedly come to diss Ataris on Atariage, it's about as brilliant as racists going to the NAACP site and dissing on the clientele there. One must ask the underlying questions: "Why?" and "What do you expect?"

 

How rude of me.... Even though this thread is titled 5200 vs. ColecoVision, I am supposed to come here just to concede that the 5200 is indeed better, because after all this is an Atari forum.... Atari fanboys are such crybabies… Atari800 better than C64. Sure, we know very well who is right here, there are hundreds of games out there to prove that…

About racism, better ask your friend atarian63, aka “if it isn’t in the US, it isn’t relevant”….

 

And atariksi, I am still waiting for the games with 23 colors/scanline….

 

Seriously, I had a great time here, even with all the Atari fanboys. I love all of you guys, we are all in the same boat, trying to do the best impression of our long dead machines. I think we have done a pretty fine job...

Atarian63 points out that the US market at the time was the worlds largest game market. Don't understand your fixation on inventing racism.

How saying that is somehow "racist" makes no sense. Seems like you have a few issues to work out. Try the P&R forum.

The US was the largest market at the time. The topic is 5200 vs colecovision.

I am certainly in the Atariski camp on this issue.

[CARTRIDGE STEALER]

To the disappointment of some and glee of others, I am kind of busy today, so not a lot of free time for AtariAge...

 

I disagree. The 8-bit Atari was a fine game machine years before the Colecovision, and years after Coleco died. From 1982 to 1985, some of the best games on the Atari XL/XE came out. I mean, Donkey Kong wasn't even released until 1983, although I'd expect you to say the excellent A8 version is inferior to the Coleco 3-screen version.

 

Do you mean that "Donkey Kong with cavities" version in 5 colors? Do you realize that in 83 DK for the Famicom was released in Japan. Now that's a very close port. I will concede that the CV version isn't that great either (but at least Mario is recognizable). Now calling the A800 version the best DK ever is too much a stretch... Actually the best version is in the works, to make companion to the best versions of Space Invaders (I and II), Pac-Man and Ms Pac-Man available on classic systems.

 

About AtariAge, as far as I know it is open to the whole classic community.

 

Indeed, it is. However, when fanboys of competing systems repeatedly come to diss Ataris on Atariage, it's about as brilliant as racists going to the NAACP site and dissing on the clientele there. One must ask the underlying questions: "Why?" and "What do you expect?"

 

How rude of me.... Even though this thread is titled 5200 vs. ColecoVision, I am supposed to come here just to concede that the 5200 is indeed better, because after all this is an Atari forum.... Atari fanboys are such crybabies… Atari800 better than C64. Sure, we know very well who is right here, there are hundreds of games out there to prove that…

About racism, better ask your friend atarian63, aka “if it isn’t in the US, it isn’t relevant”….

 

And atariksi, I am still waiting for the games with 23 colors/scanline….

 

Seriously, I had a great time here, even with all the Atari fanboys. I love all of you guys, we are all in the same boat, trying to do the best impression of our long dead machines. I think we have done a pretty fine job...

Atarian63 points out that the US market at the time was the worlds largest game market. Don't understand your fixation on inventing racism.

How saying that is somehow "racist" makes no sense. Seems like you have a few issues to work out. Try the P&R forum.

The US was the largest market at the time. The topic is 5200 vs colecovision.

I am certainly in the Atariski camp on this issue.

 

its certainly not racist. its patriotic!

[opcode]

Atarian63 points out that the US market at the time was the worlds largest game market. Don't understand your fixation on inventing racism.

How saying that is somehow "racist" makes no sense. Seems like you have a few issues to work out. Try the P&R forum.

The US was the largest market at the time. The topic is 5200 vs colecovision.

I am certainly in the Atariski camp on this issue.

 

Are you sure? By 83 the US video game market was falling apart, Japan was booming...

The topic as 5200 vs ColecoVision until some people decided the 5200 didn’t have good enough games and started to include Atari computer games. I then included the MSX, since it has about the same architecture as the CV, as a way to show the type of games that can be created using the TMS9918.

You decided the MSX wasn't relevant because it wasn't released in the US, which I personally find a very arrogant statement... BTW, 5 million MSX computers were sold worldwide…

[+Psionic]

The topic was 5200 vs ColecoVision until some people decided the 5200 didn’t have good enough games and started to include Atari computer games.

Ha! Exactly. This thread is a joke and has strayed far beyond the original discussion.

 

Funny how all this technical bile that atariksi keeps spewing doesn't translate into better games on the Atari 5200 or 8-bits. Regardless of any random technical specs, the simple fact is that most games look, sound, and play better on the Commodore 64 and ColecoVision. If he ever actually played a game, he might realize that.

 

He's right though...the Atari machines had some unbelievable color display abilities. If that putrid A8 Donkey Kong with the chunky graphics sculpted from old cottage cheese doesn't convince you, check out Spy Hunter. You gotta love that yellow car! Interesting that the programmer opted to make the car the same color as the trees (considering that the machine can display 23 colors per scanline). It's really strange that the game is superior on both the CV and the C64. But I guess it's just me!

 

I have programmed games on various systems so you are wrong.

Can we see some examples of your work? Perhaps show us what the Atari 5200 is capable of when pushed to the limits (the way opcode had done with his "imaginary games" on the ColecoVision). Unfortunately, I have a feeling that you (much like your beloved Atari machines) are all talk and no walk.

 

You're like some clown who goes around talking about how fast and badass his car is, but if someone asks you to race you say "no, I can't go above the speed limit!". I say put up or shut up.

Edited June 18, 2009 by PingvinBlueJeans

[atarian63]

Atarian63 points out that the US market at the time was the worlds largest game market. Don't understand your fixation on inventing racism.

How saying that is somehow "racist" makes no sense. Seems like you have a few issues to work out. Try the P&R forum.

The US was the largest market at the time. The topic is 5200 vs colecovision.

I am certainly in the Atariski camp on this issue.

 

Are you sure? By 83 the US video game market was falling apart, Japan was booming...

The topic as 5200 vs ColecoVision until some people decided the 5200 didn’t have good enough games and started to include Atari computer games. I then included the MSX, since it has about the same architecture as the CV, as a way to show the type of games that can be created using the TMS9918.

You decided the MSX wasn't relevant because it wasn't released in the US, which I personally find a very arrogant statement... BTW, 5 million MSX computers were sold worldwide…

I see your point from a hardware view,however it is 5200 vs colecovision.

Your opinion that the US market was not largest or that MSX is an issue in which system is better makes no sense.

My statement that MSX was not relevant to the US market,(the main game market) is just the way thing were. Pointing out the obvious is far from arrogant.

Save the fighting for P&R.

[NoahsMyBro]

Funny how all this technical bile that atariski keeps spewing doesn't translate into better games on the Atari 5200 or 8-bits. Regardless of any random technical specs, the simple fact is that most games look, sound, and play better on the Commodore 64 and ColecoVision.

 

Pingvin, the above is only your opinion, NOT AT ALL a "simple fact". I disagree. In my opinion, 5200 games look better, sound better, and most importantly, PLAY better on a 5200. I find the Colecovision controllers awkward and clumsy, imprecise, and worst-of-all, slow to respond, and I just don't like the look of the Colecovision graphics. The 5200 graphics look sharper and more vibrant to me, while the cv looks sloppy and cartoony. I dislike the NES graphics for the same reason. For that matter I dislike the standard font on the CV and NES, but I dislike the 5200 font as well, and just accept the fonts as limitations of the era.

 

You may make some valid points, but you simply can't say "the simple fact is...", followed by subjective opinion. That's no different than me stating "The simple fact is that The Beatles were the best musical group ever." I believe it, but it isn't necessarily a FACT.

[youki]

Interesting that the programmer opted to make the car the same color as the trees (considering that the machine can display 23 colors per scanline).

 

In fact it uses 23 colors per scanline , but 23 times the same yellow!