TheGameCollector #26 Posted July 22, 2011 Really if you think about it, back then computers were much like game consoles and just had some extra functions. Computers really couldn't do much yet as far as computing goes. They were about the same size as a console too. You could still take a cartridge, stick it in and play right away with a joystick, and on the TV at that. The Commodore 64 came out the same year as the Atari 5200, Colecovision and Vectrex so I would say from that generation, the Commodore 64 won. Nobody ever stopped playing video games. The Commodore 64 had cartridges like any of the other systems and it did so well that some people didn't even upgrade and buy the NES console when it came out. I personally don't get this because I find myself enjoying more Atari 8-bit games, but it's true that the Atari 8-bit was 3 years older and the Commodore 64 had many more games with all kinds of genres lasting into the early to mid 90s. I think what made the Commodore 64 so successful from a gamer's point of view was that there was a much larger library of games available for it than any of the other systems of the time. When I got my Commodore 64 all I got were floppies and just 3 cartridges of not-so-great games that the seller probably just didn't want. I also had a tape deck but Commodore 64 games took so long to load due to their size that I would rather not even bother downloading a rom to cassette and just wait till I find a cartridge. For playing games off a floppy or tape, I would say yeah that does distance itself from console gaming quite a bit. You have to know the command to type in to actually run the games. After buying some more cartridges of good games I am starting to gain more appreciation for the system and see it more like a console. It really just depends on what media format you are using, how much it acts like a console or not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Usotsuki #27 Posted July 22, 2011 Yeah, the 64 was the NES of its day, wasn't it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mbd30 #28 Posted July 22, 2011 I've never played an actual C64. During that time my family had a 8088XT clone with 640k of RAM and monochrome graphics (later upgraded to CGA). I loved the damned thing, but it wasn't meant for games. During the crash years I had an Atari 2600 and then 7800. I don't understand why some folks here have such hostility for the NES. I was a 7800 owner at the time, and I was blown away by Nintendo games like "Super Mario Bros" and "Mike Tyson's Punch-Out", and I desperately wanted a NES. It was a breath of fresh air. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
high voltage #29 Posted July 22, 2011 I don't really hate the NES and its games, I just hate Nintendo and their monopolistic tactics in the USA, and when questioned, lying about it. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maiki #30 Posted July 22, 2011 I was 12 years old in 1983, and fully interested in the C64 instead of consoles at that point... so for me, there never really was a video game crash. There were hundreds of great games both on floppies and games you could type in from print magazines. It's only when I got older that I learned there was this "Video Game Crash". In 1983 I did not even know what a computer is (though I was already here a couple of years) but I think you got it right. It was all about people moving from Atari 2600 consoles onto those Commodore home computers... The C-64 practically stole the majority of that market during 1983-85. But that's only my guessing... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maiki #31 Posted July 23, 2011 I don't really hate the NES and its games, I just hate Nintendo and their monopolistic tactics in the USA, and when questioned, lying about it. Yep, at least they got a good kick in the ass with that new 3DS portable fiasco... Seems like even all those nerds are not willing to spend their cash on anything new that comes out - good sign which I hope will follow with the coninuation of that fiasco on that Wee Urinal gimmick that is about to come next year or so. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mbd30 #32 Posted July 23, 2011 I don't really hate the NES and its games, I just hate Nintendo and their monopolistic tactics in the USA, and when questioned, lying about it. Fair enough. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mbd30 #33 Posted July 23, 2011 I don't really hate the NES and its games, I just hate Nintendo and their monopolistic tactics in the USA, and when questioned, lying about it. Yep, at least they got a good kick in the ass with that new 3DS portable fiasco... And they got a bit of a taste of their own medicine in the 90's when Sony got better third party support. I think that was mostly Nintendo's fault for sticking with carts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Usotsuki #34 Posted July 23, 2011 I've never played an actual C64. During that time my family had a 8088XT clone with 640k of RAM and monochrome graphics (later upgraded to CGA). I loved the damned thing, but it wasn't meant for games. I know what you mean. My first 3 computers were all IBM - a PCjr (240K RAM), 5160 XT (256K RAM/MDA), 5160 XT (640K RAM/CGA). The PCjr died fast and hard (secondhand as many of my computers have been) but the first 5160 lasted me a few years and I did a lot with it, but...not a gaming system. My avatar is my newest piece of old hardware...another 5160 XT. This one's got a VGA...it ought to be able to play some of the classics when I get it over. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NinjaWarrior #35 Posted July 24, 2011 I don't really hate the NES and its games, I just hate Nintendo and their monopolistic tactics in the USA, and when questioned, lying about it. Nintendo prob would have tried the same thing..if there wasn't no Crash Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chrisbid #36 Posted July 24, 2011 Yeah, the 64 was the NES of its day, wasn't it? atari 2600 sold - 30 million nes sold - 60 million c64 sold - 17 million not quite Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seob #37 Posted July 24, 2011 Yeah, the 64 was the NES of its day, wasn't it? atari 2600 sold - 30 million nes sold - 60 million c64 sold - 17 million not quite I never trust those old sales figures. There are way to much different figures on the web to make a true estimate. I just read a article on c64 sales figure, ranging from 30 million to 12 million. Same goes for sales figures of all retro consoles/computers. C64 sales figures Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
high voltage #38 Posted July 25, 2011 (edited) That is so true, all companies overinflate their hardware sales figures (Game Over (book) even states that Nintendo and Sega did just that), just like record companies did back in the days. I always figured C64 near the 11 mill mark, so I was pretty close. Anyway, here's what would have happened without the crash: Edited July 25, 2011 by high voltage Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vic George 2K3 #39 Posted July 25, 2011 In 1989 we would have been playing the latest "Pac-Man", "Centipede" and "Dig Dug" on our Atari 10400's. Just like Nintendo is doing for 20+ years with Mario and Zelda. So nothing changed. Except that the Mario and Zelda series has evolved over the years. What kind of evolution could Pac-Man, Centipede, and Dig Dug have offered? Very little. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rex Dart #40 Posted July 25, 2011 (edited) Except that the Mario and Zelda series has evolved over the years. What kind of evolution could Pac-Man, Centipede, and Dig Dug have offered? Very little. Dig Dug turned into Mr Driller & has had at least a half-dozen new titles, and Pac-Man's now starred in point & click adventures, 3D platformers, board games, puzzle games... Edited July 25, 2011 by Rex Dart Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mbd30 #41 Posted July 25, 2011 In 1989 we would have been playing the latest "Pac-Man", "Centipede" and "Dig Dug" on our Atari 10400's. Just like Nintendo is doing for 20+ years with Mario and Zelda. So nothing changed. Except that the Mario and Zelda series has evolved over the years. What kind of evolution could Pac-Man, Centipede, and Dig Dug have offered? Very little. The evolution of "Pac-Man": 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nukey Shay #42 Posted July 25, 2011 Missing from your post: 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tz101 #43 Posted July 25, 2011 Except that the Mario and Zelda series has evolved over the years. What kind of evolution could Pac-Man, Centipede, and Dig Dug have offered? Very little. Some forget that Mario actually began life as a character called Jumpman in the game known as Donkey Kong. Who could have predicted all the ways Nintendo has exploited him from that point forward? Using that path as a parallel, I could see Dig Dug being thrown into all types of story lines and adventures. Namco and Atari just didn't try to milk him for all he is worth like Nintendo has done with the Jumpman/Mario character. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rex Dart #44 Posted July 25, 2011 I could see Dig Dug being thrown into all types of story lines and adventures. What I would give to see him playable in Street Fighter vs Tekken (he's a Namco so...)... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord