Atari 2600 or the Nintendo NES?

[desiv]

Mine ejects M Network carts. They pop up like pop-tarts.

That just means they are ready!!!

 

desiv

[AtariLeaf]

[Cebus Capucinis]

 

I'll see your JPG and raise you an animated GIF!

 

[AtariLeaf]

 

I'll see your JPG and raise you an animated GIF!

 

 

Well if we're going to use Star Trek images, then you must bow to Picard - king of the facepalm!

 

[raskar42]

my atari works the first time - every time.

 

Mine ejects M Network carts. They pop up like pop-tarts.

 

your atari still holds a grudge.

[GKC]

Well since the Jaguar wasn't an option (I have no idea why) I picked the NES. It was the system I grew up with so there is the nostalgia factor and also it has the games that I would want to play more.

[VectorGamer]

My first NES I bought in '86 and first impressions were good with Duck Hunt/Super Mario. But, then I got some crap games like Batman and Joe Montana Football which were a buzz killer. Joe Montana Football was fun for a 1/2 hour until I figured out that all I had to do was pass to John Taylor all the time and he'd run up the sideline for a touchdown.

 

My current NES collection is roughly 95% classic arcade ports. I've found that anything but arcade ports are pretty lame.

 

Now, you'll probably say "well, what about e.g. Mythicon games for the 2600?" Yeah, those games suck balls. But, I think the 2600 has the edge on games with imagination: Kool-Aid Man, Beat 'Em And Eat 'Em, Avalanche Kaboom etc...

[Cebus Capucinis]

Let's just say I'm keeping track and it doesn't look good for those who voted NES......

 

 

[GKC]

Let's just say I'm keeping track and it doesn't look good for those who voted NES......

 

 

 

.......I change my vote.

[Cebus Capucinis]

LOL! Joking aside, I'm surprised that the voting has been neck-and-neck, or at least as close as it has been. I think both have their merits but obviously side with the good ol' VCS as I grew up with it more. I just figured since it's an Atari site Atari would be blowing NES out of the water.

[A2600]

I wouldn't be frequenting AtariAge if NES was my answer.

 

[Armonigann]

NES..

up

up

down

down

left

right

left

right....

[rhindlethereddragon]

I can't really give an answer on this one. The style of games is far too different overall, and both were equally important in terms of making videogames a pop-culture phenomenon.

 

Well, which style games do you prefer more? Maybe that'll help you answer?

[raskar42]

just figured since it's an Atari site Atari would be blowing NES out of the water.

 

personally i like the lack of flaming fanboyism in this thread.

honestly, as much as i love my atari - it's hard for me to say with certainty that it's "greater" than the nes.

 

 

imho

[DemonoidTentacle]

NES. But I really don't think the two should be compared.

[rhindlethereddragon]

just figured since it's an Atari site Atari would be blowing NES out of the water.

 

personally i like the lack of flaming fanboyism in this thread.

honestly, as much as i love my atari - it's hard for me to say with certainty that it's "greater" than the nes.

 

 

imho

 

Here's why I think the Atari was greater than the NES:

 

Lack of licences - developers weren't bound by the constraints of having a game approved. It was an "anything goes" environment, and the greatest, most innovative games in the entire history of videogaming came out during the 2600 reign. Yes, there are some lacklustre games on the Atari, but that especially holds true for Nintendo. Nintendo's "seal of quality" has nothing to do with quality and everything to do with money and control.

 

The Atari was a quality machine all the way around. You put the game in, and it played. You didn't have to "jiggle" it for 20 minutes hitting reset repeatedly.

 

Both systems have great controllers, however the edge goes to the Atari joystick. Try playing Pac Man with the NES joypad, for example.

 

This is an opinion, but the games on the Atari were just far more interesting than NES games as a whole.

 

Atari games often had TONS of "game variations" so you really got your money's worth.

 

The Atari - while not as powerful, could handle just about any arcade game you could throw at it. There was nothing this machine couldn't do!

 

Atari was an American company. 'Nuff said.

[Bloodreign]

As a young child I had an Atari 2600, played the hell out of the thing till it died. My dad bought another after, played it to death as well. Got my NES in 1988 after playing the system since it came out here, got almost 300 games for it. 23 years later my toaster NES still works, and now I have a toploader. Have 10 other systems as well, but won't go into detail here as it's 2600 Vs. NES.

[MagitekAngel]

I wouldn't be frequenting AtariAge if NES was my answer.

 

I have to disagree with you there! I prefer the NES as a system, but I prefer AtariAge as a forum because for the most part its members are substantially more intelligent, articulate, and mature than those on NintendoAge!

[bomberpunk]

NES.

[littleman jack]

Atari 2600 all the way.

[onlysublime]

it would've been a moot point if Atari didn't turn down Nintendo offer to sell the console under the Atari brand name. that must be one of the biggest faux pas ever. but I understand Atari's position. the video game market had just crashed and Atari was trying to survive the flames.

[toiletunes]

NES has two buttons, saves, better audio, better video, and lengthier, more detailed games.

 

Atari has reliability, variety, endlabels, and odd personalities- from Coconuts to Custer's Revenge.

 

I only play for a few minutes at a time, so I vote Atari. You can't enjoy Zelda a few minutes at a time.

[+wood_jl]

Posting this on an Atari fan site....hmm, I wonder how the results will turn out....

 

Exactly. Post this on a NES fan site and the results will be just the other way. It's not really fair to post this here to get a 'fair' opinion.

 

Having said that, I notice a lot of hate for the NES on here and I just don't understand it. Both systems were great with large libaries of games covering just about any topic and were groundbreaking for their time.

 

Surprise, NES ahead 30 to 23, as I read this (for the first time).

 

 

 

I wouldn't be frequenting AtariAge if NES was my answer.

 

Ha. NES is my answer, and it has nothing to do with the reason why I am frequenting AtariAge. The Atari 8-bit computer is primarily why I visit AtariAge. After that, it's a toss-up between the Atari ST and the Atari 2600. The Atari scene in general is why I visit AtariAge, not because I think the 2600 is the greatest thing ever created.

 

I think it speaks highly of AtariAge members - and Atari enthusiasts in general - that the NES is ahead. It demonstrates that this isn't a biased, myopic community, but an open-minded and unbiased one, as well. The NES came later! It should fully be expected to be "better." The fact that I admire the NES and have fond memories of it has NOTHING TO DO with the fact that I have the same for the Atari 2600. They weren't even competitors. Had the question been split in to "What's the best system of the early 80s?" and "What's the best system of the late 80s?", then they'd both win. To many aging console enthusiasts, the progression WAS from 2600 to NES, ignoring all the novelty systems that cropped up around those two. It's only childish fanboyism (which, unfortunately, is in no short supply) that creates difficulty in granting "the other brand" of console the respect that it EARNED.

[AtariBrian]

i would say its a tie. but gotta admit if i see an atari at say... a garage sale my eyes light up but a nintendo... ehh no big deal. but the atari is so much more durable! both are great

[onlysublime]

this is a silly argument. it's like saying, which do you prefer, the Xbox 360 or the NES? you can't. they're from different eras. but I'm sure there are people out there that prefer the NES to a PS3.