FlightSuit Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Why the Hell would somebody bug you about playing games on a 2600? If they can't understand concepts like nostalgia, retro-cool, and enjoying classic collector's items, they must not be very bright. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaximRecoil Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I am 34 and I wasn't real pleased with the home console situation as a kid. All the games paled in comparison to what was available in the arcades and that irritated me. It was kind of depressing in 1984 to come home to this... ... after playing this... ... at the arcade. I'm most nostalgic about the arcades. I viewed home consoles of the time as being a "better than nothing" thing for when I was fresh out of quarters. I now own several arcade machines (including a Super Punch-Out/Punch-Out machine), and that covers a good deal of the nostalgia. If I could get Lawton Mann to come over and go head to head with me for high score on Super Punch-Out, just like we used to do in the '80s, that would cover even more nostalgia. The atmosphere of a real arcade (no, there were no music videos playing on the wall, and the only black lights were from Tron) was cool, but I'm not terribly nostalgic about it; mainly because I mostly played arcade games at the local laundromat and general store. The closest dedicated arcade (Space Port in the mall) was some 45 miles away so I didn't go there all that often until I got my driver's license in '92; just in time for the Street Fighter II craze. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+save2600 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 (edited) I am 34 and I wasn't real pleased with the home console situation as a kid. All the games paled in comparison to what was available in the arcades and that irritated me. That was the beauty of the arcade phenomenon. Arcades were and *ARE* supposed to be superior to their console counterparts. Outside of the social aspect, why bugger with them otherwise? Only recently (last 20 years) has this changed due to consumer electronic technology having caught up. Edited August 20, 2009 by save2600 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballistik Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I don't blame you! I had a great time growing up in the early 80's amidst this whole video game revolution. Atari and then NES ruled and it was such a fun time for me and my friends back then... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectorGamer Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I am 34 and I wasn't real pleased with the home console situation as a kid. All the games paled in comparison to what was available in the arcades and that irritated me. It was kind of depressing in 1984 to come home to this... I'm most nostalgic about the arcades. I viewed home consoles of the time as being a "better than nothing" thing for when I was fresh out of quarters. I now own several arcade machines (including a Super Punch-Out/Punch-Out machine), and that covers a good deal of the nostalgia. If I could get Lawton Mann to come over and go head to head with me for high score on Super Punch-Out, just like we used to do in the '80s, that would cover even more nostalgia. The atmosphere of a real arcade (no, there were no music videos playing on the wall, and the only black lights were from Tron) was cool, but I'm not terribly nostalgic about it; mainly because I mostly played arcade games at the local laundromat and general store. The closest dedicated arcade (Space Port in the mall) was some 45 miles away so I didn't go there all that often until I got my driver's license in '92; just in time for the Street Fighter II craze. Interesting read and I agree with the console vs. arcade quality comparison. I think at the time home consoles conceded not living up to the arcade hardware/software and gamers regarded them, as you said, "better than nothing." This was Coleco's M.O. in bringing the arcade experience into the home and why they made such a big splash with the release of Donkey Kong. No other console at that time had anything close (barring older games like Circus, Breakout et al)to arcade quality audio/video. Atari made a "smaller splash" years earlier with the release of Space Invaders for the 2600. Remember that Space Invaders is THE game that started the whole video game craze. Atari's port of Space Invaders was not even close to arcade perfect (buy Space Invaders Arcade), but they did an excellent job and this release was a HUGE turning point in video game history. Some will argue how arcade imperfect Donkey Kong is for the ColecoVision (missing intermissions, levels etc.). But, the fact is that gamers (at least the majority) at the time of its release found these shortcomings to be forgiving amidst being awestruck of having this in their own home. Reading the book Racing the Beam gave me a great appreciation of what programmers have been able to do with the Atari 2600 - Stargate or Medieval Mayhem come to mind. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpgfaker Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I'm 39 and if there ever was one thing I remember most as the benchmarks of gaming...walking in the arcade and hearing Wizard of Wor talk, it was the first arcade cabinet in my favorite arcade to have speech..just blew me away, Dragon's Lair was another shocker, Alone in the Dark was another, Tomb Raider was another, Goldeneye was another, Shadow of the Colossus was yet another..looking at it all and where gaming systems are today I don't think the graphics can get any 'better' now that they are just short of photo realistic complete with surround sound, lol. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atari2008 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I'm 15 and i like my new (well to me) atari 2600. yeh, if i lived then, people probably wouldnt bug me about playing it. i think more people should try it so they wont be stupid about it just cuz its old. I hear you, I'm 26 and I get flack for my classic gaming also. I think a lot of people particularly people who didn't grow up with these classic systems like the 2600, don't have an appreciation for it or for things that are older for that matter. I think you should consider yourself lucky that you can appreciate the beauty of vintage gaming. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlightSuit Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Flack? Who in their right mind would give you flack over your gaming preferences? It's not like it hurts them. Tell your friends to find something real to worry about. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atari2008 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Flack? Who in their right mind would give you flack over your gaming preferences? It's not like it hurts them. Tell your friends to find something real to worry about. Tell me about it, and it's one of those things that at first I could laugh off and say okay that's cute, but after a while it gets old. And at the end of the day, my playing 2600 isn't that different from them playing their PS3's - it's still the same activity. But I agree, which is why I think it's nice that sites like Atari Age exist where I can share this hobby with other people. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlightSuit Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 If you were an arsonist or a child molester, that would be something to give you flack about. Giving somebody flack about something that's not harmful to anybody makes no sense. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectorGamer Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 If you were an arsonist or a child molester, that would be something to give you flack about. Giving somebody flack about something that's not harmful to anybody makes no sense. Which is what I tell people when I get flack over obsessive masturbation... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlightSuit Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Seriously! Any time I'm asked to get off a bus or subway or leave the dressing room at Lane Bryant, I tell them, "I'm just masturbating! It's not hurting anybody!" 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
16-bit Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Which is what I tell people when I get flack over obsessive masturbation... Is that while you play Atari ? That's impressive. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectorGamer Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Which is what I tell people when I get flack over obsessive masturbation... Is that while you play Atari ? That's impressive. Actually the ColecoVision because they had the XXXpansion Module... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carmel_andrews Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Whilst I didn't own a 2600, i do remember gaming on that platform as far back as 1980/1981 when i saw a shop display in Margate (cliftonville) in WH Smiths, whilst the graphics etc were'nt arcade quality, who cared... it was the gameplay and the concept behind the game that was it's driving force Anyone for a thrashing on realsports tennis (that was a game i was ok at) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaximRecoil Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 whilst the graphics etc were'nt arcade quality, who cared... it was the gameplay and the concept behind the game that was it's driving force Some concepts and gameplay elements require a certain level of hardware capability to render satisfactorily. Plus nice graphics are satisfying to look at in and of themselves. For example, I'd rather watch a cartoon or read a comic book with good drawings, rather than poorly done drawings. Video games, like comic books and cartoons, are a visual medium; the images play a significant part in relaying the experience. Now, I prefer a game with good gameplay and bad graphics to a game with good graphics and bad gameplay, but that doesn't mean graphics are not important. I'd much rather have both good graphics and good gameplay, than solely one or the other. You don't even need terribly powerful hardware for eye pleasing graphics. You just need enough power to give your sprites several colors and some curves (rather than blocks). For example, the lowly (by today's standards) Nintendo Radar Scope hardware from 1980 was capable of making Donkey Kong look good. Nintendo's Popeye and Punch-Out looked awesome, and still do IMO. Bally Midway's MCR-3 hardware (e.g., Tapper, Timber, Demolition Derby, Discs of Tron) was capable of beautiful graphics in 1983. The Atari 2600 had horrible graphics; there are no two ways about it. Its hardware design dates from the mid-1970s and it was primarily designed to play Pong-type games. Yes, the programmers eventually squeezed more out of it than was originally thought possible, but even the best graphics on the 2600 don't even approach the level of a simple low-budget cartoon. The Intellivision wasn't much better, and the ColecoVision and Atari 5200 were big improvements but still had a ways to go just to reach arcade Donkey Kong-level graphics (which I consider to be the minimum for eye-pleasing graphics that feature human and/or animal characters). The NES was the first console in the U.S. to have nice looking graphics IMO, and that was 1983 technology. Unfortunately; in 1983 we still didn't have anything like that in the U.S. in console form; what with the video game crash going on and all. It was the difference between what could have been, and what was, that irritated me back then. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevEng Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Classis consoles were inferior to their arcade game counterparts technologically, no doubt. But keep in mind that arcade games are inferior to the consoles as far as the long-lived games are concerned. You'd never see a game like Adventure or Legend of Zelda in the arcades. Also, sometimes the "resistance of the media" helps to create some surprising art. Yar's Revenge being a loose adaptation of Star Castle is just one example. I always treated the 2600 (and later my a8) as a compliment to the arcade experience rather than a way to save quarters, and to this day I find both enjoyable but different experiences. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Thag Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 I always treated the 2600 (and later my a8) as a compliment to the arcade experience rather than a way to save quarters, and to this day I find both enjoyable but different experiences. Well said. Same here. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirin jensen Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 whilst the graphics etc were'nt arcade quality, who cared... it was the gameplay and the concept behind the game that was it's driving force Some concepts and gameplay elements require a certain level of hardware capability to render satisfactorily. Plus nice graphics are satisfying to look at in and of themselves. For example, I'd rather watch a cartoon or read a comic book with good drawings, rather than poorly done drawings. Video games, like comic books and cartoons, are a visual medium; the images play a significant part in relaying the experience. Now, I prefer a game with good gameplay and bad graphics to a game with good graphics and bad gameplay, but that doesn't mean graphics are not important. I'd much rather have both good graphics and good gameplay, than solely one or the other. You don't even need terribly powerful hardware for eye pleasing graphics. You just need enough power to give your sprites several colors and some curves (rather than blocks). For example, the lowly (by today's standards) Nintendo Radar Scope hardware from 1980 was capable of making Donkey Kong look good. Nintendo's Popeye and Punch-Out looked awesome, and still do IMO. Bally Midway's MCR-3 hardware (e.g., Tapper, Timber, Demolition Derby, Discs of Tron) was capable of beautiful graphics in 1983. Well, not to poke the stick too far into the bee's nest, but: Scott McCloud covers this very well in Understanding Comics. Often, simplified graphics allow for a much cloder identification of the self with the character onscreen. And frankly, Demon Attack still looks breathtaking on the 2600. But what do I know? I'm still playing on the Odyssey2 I always wanted and never got until the 2000s. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaximRecoil Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Well, not to poke the stick too far into the bee's nest, but: Scott McCloud covers this very well in Understanding Comics. Often, simplified graphics allow for a much cloder identification of the self with the character onscreen. "Simplified" is relative. Scott McCloud's drawings go far beyond what the Atari 2600 is capable of. And simplified graphics are fine, as long as they don't go into "abstract" territory. For example, the arcade Donkey Kong and Mario sprites are simple, but they look good. And frankly, Demon Attack still looks breathtaking on the 2600. Yes, it does look good, but there are no human or animal characters in it either. The 2600 is fine for games like that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gloriousconnor Posted September 9, 2009 Author Share Posted September 9, 2009 Well, all I know is I couldn't give a damn about the graphical capabilities of the 2600; my friends and I have had more fun playing games on it than any other console. And that's saying A LOT. So, yeah, we love it 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlightSuit Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 The thing is, back when the 2600 was a current machine, even people who loved it were not especially forgiving of its graphical limitations. If people at the time had been content with the 2600, you never would have seen things like the Starpath Supercharger, and the main selling point of consoles like the Intellivision and Colecovision wouldn't have been the fact that their graphics were much better. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gloriousconnor Posted September 9, 2009 Author Share Posted September 9, 2009 The thing is, back when the 2600 was a current machine, even people who loved it were not especially forgiving of its graphical limitations. If people at the time had been content with the 2600, you never would have seen things like the Starpath Supercharger, and the main selling point of consoles like the Intellivision and Colecovision wouldn't have been the fact that their graphics were much better. Yeah, that's very true. I wonder what video games will be like, say, 20 years from now... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlightSuit Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 I'm sure we'll have no concerns about frame rates or whether to turn on anti-aliasing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dittohead Servbot #24 Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 I'm "only" 29, so I didn't grow up during the Atari 2600 era, but for my 10th birthday I was introduced to the NES! I started out playing Duck Hunt, then Super Mario Bros. Later I got 10 Yard Fight, Baseball, Metroid, and Legend of Zelda. For my 11th birthday I got my very own copy of Super Mario Bros 3 which I would play until literally the cartridge felt hot (no, it didn't damage it). I also remember back in 1991 wanting a Super Nintendo sooooo badly, even though my parents insisted that "I already have a Nintendo". I did finally get that Super Nintendo...three years later. But it was a good time to get one because I got the one with Mario World AND All-Stars. Now those were the days of video gaming! NES, you got TWO controllers, Zapper, Mario and Duck Hunt. Super NES? I got TWO controllers and FIVE Mario games standard! Try getting that kind of package from Hype-Box 360 or P$3. And I remember being so amazed at the graphics in games like StarFox and the Donkey Kong Country Trilogy. I know it's more politically correct to say "graphics don't matter, only gameplay does" but why not appreciate awesome graphics/sound on a classic console. I mean, weren't you 2600 gamers amazed at how graphically advanced Pitfall was compared to the other 2600 games before it? Anyway, I may not have grown up with the 2600, but I'm VERY fortunate that I DID grow up in the late 8-bit and 16-bit era. And I'm so excited that I'm going to build a NES/SNES collecting this Christmas season that I'll be so proud of. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.