Why wasn't the 5200 more popular than it was?

[jetset]

I likrf the 5200 controller. Just hated the fire buttons always wearing out.

[tyranthraxus]

Say did anyone else read the fairly recent thread in the 2600 forum about

the idea that Atari should have made Pac-man a 5200 exclusive pack in?

Intriguing idea since Super Breakout is arguably the worst pack in game

ever.

 

John

[chrisbid]

worse than Poker and Blackjack for the INTV, or even PacMan for the VCS? or how about no packin game like most modern consoles

[rxd]

I hate to show my age but I bought an Atari 5200 when it first came out so I lived through that whole period of time. Basically the reason the 5200 wasn't so popular was packaging Super Breakout with it while Colecovision came with Donkey Kong. If you weren't into the home video game scene at that time you simply can't believe how big Donkey Kong was at that time. It was huge. Every store that was selling video games at that time had Donkey Kong up on their screens. It was everywhere. The in the corner was the 5200 running Super Breakout. Really, the comparison was pathetic. Now I've always been a huge 5200 fan and think it was superior to the Colecovision, but I've got to admit Donkey Kong was a damn good game. Overall the Atari wins the battle with the quality of its games, but it had nothing to compair with the popularity of Donkey Kong. Even PacMan wasn't as popular as Donkey Kong was at that time. Plus after shelling out big money to get a system, and remember this was 20 years ago, a dollar was worth a hell of alot more then than it is now and still those systems were around $300, and getting home and playing Super Breakout, you did feel like you were kind of screwed. But still I've never regretted buying that 5200. What a blast I had with that system!

[Video]

I know the graphics of Super Break out sucked, hell, they weren't any better than the 2600 version (except I think the blocks "poped" when the ball hit them) But it did show off something that Donkey kong and Pac-Man wouldn't have.

 

The Analog joystic. DK and Pac-Man wouldn't need analog controll, but for the first time, you could use a joystic to push the paddle at variable speeds.

 

I still think it would have been better to pack in a great game, and sell Break out later. A great game that doesn't use the systems prized feature, is better than a poor old game that using that feature is the only thing going for it.

[tyranthraxus]

Yeah Donkey Kong was a craze. I was obsessed with that game for quite

a while. But Pac-Man is no slouch. It had its pop song, cartoon., trading

cards and cereal And Atari was wize enough to not to port Pac-man to

Colecovision, although a proto exists. But imagine if the solid 5200

Pac-man was the original pack in or better yet exclusive to the system

(or at least for say 6 month before the inevitable 2600 port). Imagine

having to make that choice in 1982? 5200 Pac man vs CV Kong?

It seems like the 5200 was a loyalist system and the more mercenary

Atari owners switched to the hot new system which was the trend with

Nintendo and Sega too.

 

John

[NovaXpress]

I was 12 when the 5200 came out and remember the schoolyard debates well. I also had a relative who sold video games at retail. The Colecovision sales blew away the 5200 for the first year, almost certainly attributable to the poor quality of 5200 launch titles in general, not just Donkey Kong. Atari offered the same old games ported straight from the 400/800 and everyone knew it. Colecovision offered games many had never seen in the arcade, as well as the cool steering wheel for Turbo and a jaw-dropping (for the time) Zaxxon. Don't forget about Smurf Rescue, which my uncle put up on the Coleco display rather than Donkey Kong and moved a LOT of copies with families and women. Look in the old Electronic Games at the reviews. All the launch titles for Coleco were praised endlessly while Atari barely got people excited enough to write a review. Of course we know how things went from there. 5200 games got better and better while Coleco had little to offer after the launch.

 

A PacMan pack-in would not have helped. Gamers had already been burned on the 2600 version, everyone in the arcades had moved on to Ms.PacMan, and Coleco's Lady Bug was superior anyway. In the fall of 1982 nobody cared about PacMan anymore. No matter how good the 5200 version is, the game was almost three years old. 5200 PacMan was no more valuable to the system than Super Breakout was. Donkey Kong was the big mainstream hit of the time, and Zaxxon was considered state-of-the-art.

 

The controllers for both systems were abysmal, so its a wash. Controllers don't sell a system. If the games are good people will adapt to any controller that they're given or get a third-party replacement. I went with Wico for both systems.

 

I feel the 5200 was simply rushed to market, Atari needed a system to compete with Intellivision and as usual marketing was calling the shots:

"Why not reuse the 400 and all the old games? The kids are so gullible they'll buy anything, just like they're gonna buy all those copies of E.T. this Christmas as well!"

[Nukey Shay]

That was my opinion at the time...especially since I already HAD an Atari 800 computer. Within the first week at launch, there were controller complaints. And the games certianly didn't look any more complex than what I was already playing, so I went for the CV (which at least LOOKED promising). The problem was that after getting the CV games home, I noticed quite a few things missing (like the springs, the 4th screen,...) and a few things done differently (like the much less "intelligent" fireballs, the ability to "fall" off girders,...), as well as a misconception about the games themselves (i.e. the menu system could have used more flexibility and options), and gripes with IT's controllers (goddamn doorknobs!). I kinda took it in stride, since the games were still fun and I assumed that better things were on the horizon. But you are absolutely correct that Atari's games got better while CV's got worse (and very soon, the same titles being released for the CV were being done much better on the 800 computer that I had all along ). In short, BOTH systems had some messed up ideas of how to market them. The absolute main problem with the 5200 was that it didn't offer the option of digital controllers, I think.

[mos6507]

When did the Atari 8-bit version of Donkey Kong come out?

 

It was quite excellent and I put many hours into it. It was one of the first carts I bought for my 8-bit.

 

Wasn't it available on the 5200?

[Nukey Shay]

It says right on the screen. 1983, I think (memory getting fuzzy). Released during the heady AtariSoft days.

[sku_u]

When did the Atari 8-bit version of Donkey Kong come out?

 

It was quite excellent and I put many hours into it.  It was one of the first carts I bought for my 8-bit.

 

Wasn't it available on the 5200?

 

Donkey Kong was never released for the 5200.

[Nukey Shay]

Yep. Wasn't that due to Coleco having the console rights? Since the 800 was a full computer system, Nintendo would be able to license the concept to both companies.

[Vanguard]

There were a few reasons that the Colecovision did better than the Atari 2600. The two I hear most cited, though, were the pack-in and the joystick.

 

The pack-in was Breakout... they had to be insane for that. A 1975 game released as a selling point in 1983. The next generation of arcade games were already coming out, and Atari packs in Breakout? At least it wasn't Pong, but they could have (and should have) put in Pac Man or Ms Pac Man instead.

 

The joystick! Egads! While it's true that the Colecovision stick was no charmer, the 5200's controller was just plain abysmal. Many of the 5200's games were just frustrating to play with that dog. Third party sticks helped a bit, but most moms and dads weren't about to spend the extra cash on the 5200 unless those sticks were actually broken.

 

There are other issues. Most of the 5200's line up seemed too familiar. Games from 1975-1980 had already been driven to death on the 2600, which was still being heavily pushed. (Atari didn't push the 5200 much, if at all, and continued to bank on the 2600). Too few of the 'new games' were passed by to focus on the 'safe hits' from years before.

 

Despite it being a solid system at the time, there just wasn't a lot of reason to actually go out and buy it. Colecovision dominated for the time, though they too would collapse in a relatively short time.

[Joey Kay]

Interesting thread...

 

Atari really had an ego problem during 82-83 and believed anything they made would sell just because it was an Atari product. Hence, the abysmal Super Breakout pack-in. (that ego problem also explains the absolutely remedial design of the 1200XL that couldn't fit third-party cartridges in the slot)

 

Really... What were they thinking?

 

Cheers!

 

Joey

[Retro Rogue]

There were a few reasons that the Colecovision did better than the Atari 2600. The two I hear most cited, though, were the pack-in and the joystick.

 

The pack-in was Breakout... they had to be insane for that. A 1975 game released as a selling point in 1983. The next generation of arcade games were already coming out, and Atari packs in Breakout? At least it wasn't Pong, but they could have (and should have) put in Pac Man or Ms Pac Man instead.

 

The pack-in was Super Breakout, not Breakout. Breakout was released in 1976, not 1975. Super Breakout was released in 1978, admittedly still a 4 year old game. Though Atari did eventually switch the pack-in to Pac-Man.

 

Despite it being a solid system at the time, there just wasn't a lot of reason to actually go out and buy it. Colecovision dominated for the time, though they too would collapse in a relatively short time.

 

Colecovision's end was due to the management deciding to go after the "holy grail" of the 70's and early 80's - the promise that your console could be turned in to a full blown computer. Coleco was a pioneer in expansion and peripheral products, and they built in a lot of expandability to the Colecovision. The Super Game Module (think 32X style expansion for the Genesis) would have upgraded the CV to the NES/7800 level of gameplay back in 1983 so that it could keep up with the changing pace of arcade graphics in the coming mid 80's. Remember that short of Donkey Kong, all of Colecovision's other titles were licesnsed ports of 2nd class games (since the other companies had already snatched up licenses to the most popular first tier games). This was a good strategy, and when Coleco was able to reproduce all those titles almost exactly the same in quality as their arcade counterparts - that was a big plus. But most of Coleco's titles were '80-'82 arcade games. By '82-'83 the coin-op industry was starting a sharp decline (for seperate reasons) and many of the people they licensed from either drastically cut the number of titles they were releasing in the arcades (Exidy) or relesed crappy games not worth licensing (Universal), exited the business, or looked for other avenues of licensing (Sega). So unless they would have sought to develop their own original games (ala Nintendo later on) or hire outside development firms, the games were starting to dry up (as someone mentioned that Coleco's games were getting crappier later on). By '83-'84 the bottom of the conosole industry was falling out and they cancelled the Super Game system in favor of the Adam system that they had also announced at the same time. By '84 they dediced to cancel production of the Colecovision itself to concentrate on the Adam. It was frustrating at the time, because I had stock in Coleco and would get the quarterly prospectus where they announced their strategies for the coming quarters.

 

Now, regarding the 5200 - I had a 2600 from '77 up until late '82. I remember the big thing with the 5200 when it came out here was that people weren't being it because it wasn't backwards compatible and the joysticks felt really wierd compared to the 2600 ones everyone was used to. Parents were not about to go buy a new system from the same company and start over the entire collection of cartridges they had been getting for their kids from '77-'82. Especially when there were still lots of new games still coming out for the 2600. Now oddly, they had no problem switching to a completely different brand (such as my parents) where they felt if they were going to trade up to the latest technology - the Colecovision was the hotest thing at the time (as someone said, Donkey Kong was all over the place at the time). I guess with the 2600-5200 it was seen as an "upgrade" that fell short of an upgrade beause of backwards compatibility, the same titles they already had on the 2600 instead of new and interesting titles, and the sticks being so different. 2600-Colecovision was viewed by parents like something worthwhile if they were going to move to something new. A big advancement of graphics, lot's of new titles that weren't on other systems, a driving controller coming out and the promise of playing the 2600 games on the new system.

 

That last big didn't help me though, my parents had sold my heavy sixer and entire cartridge collection to help pay for the Colecovision.

[Vanguard]

The pack-in was Super Breakout, not Breakout. Breakout was released in 1976, not 1975. Super Breakout was released in 1978, admittedly still a 4 year old game. Though Atari did eventually switch the pack-in to Pac-Man.

 

Dates were going by memory, jeeze... didn't realize I needed my books next to me or anything!

 

Still, arguing that a slapped-together Breakout mod for 1978 was a good idea for a 1983 console seems rather daft, though. Breakout, super or not, just looked pretty damn primitive. Of all the games in Atari's vast catalog, that's one near the bottom of the 'must get' list. There were better looking games on the 2600 at the time.

 

Colecovision's end was due to the management deciding to go after the "holy grail" of the 70's and early 80's - the promise that your console could be turned in to a full blown computer.

 

Oh, that was certainly the biggest factor. And, truth be told, if Coleco had gone the route of the Vic20 (and eventually the C64), their gamble would have been on the money. Sadly, they threw together a totally buggy, crap-laden system with hardware that was already being rendered obsolete, and at a price-tag that kept them out of the market. But, that's for another thread, I guess.

 

Point being, though the Atari 5200 was slaughtered by the ColecoVision in the 'third console war', that war ended with pretty much everyone losing in a big way. Too bad, though, with some work, either system could have lasted it out until the NES came out.

[Brad2600]

Compared to all the other Atari consoles, nothing evokes excitement in me as often as the 5200.

 

It's just special in it's own right.

 

The games rock.

 

The controllers are ok..because I have a Wico!

 

It's just a special system.

 

And one that has a lot of undiscovered potential(homebrewers, are you reading this?)

 

Viva le 5200!

[tyranthraxus]

I wouldn't go so far to say that the late run CV games got worse.

Qbert and Frogger have better ports than the 52 (a lot of that is due

to controller issues) Tarzan was quite a improvement over the early

games. Tapper and Spy Hunter were great late releases. The

Super Game Module is an important mistake. I think that the CV

was in a great position to corner the market. But computers were

the trend and the Adam turned out terrible. But Atari's core

of programmers showed their worth overall. The 5200 does have

the better curve of game improvement.

 

Atari was very short sighted with Pac-man. I think they should have held

out on releasing the 2600 version and made it the pack in and a 5200

exclusive for its first few months. It would have made an impact.

[Vanguard]

Compared to all the other Atari consoles, nothing evokes excitement in me as often as the 5200.

 

Well, I have to admit, I was stuck with the Coleco Adam as my game rig after the 2600 finally died. My dad would simply not buy me another dedicated gaming console, because it was waste of money, of course.

 

So he bought the Adam.

 

So much for not wasting money. At least I still had my trusty MC-10.

 

The Atari 5200, though, was a 'legend' machine. Only one guy I knew had one, and we played Qix and Ms Pac Man for hours. Then he would come over, and we played Donkey Kong and Venture for hours. Worked out well, that.

 

Then the Adam died a fiery death. Literally. Black smoke poured out of the back as the power-system finally overloaded the bloody thing.

 

Dad chose a replacement, though. A CoCo 1. It was cheaper than the C64, you see, and he didn't want to waste the money.

 

See a pattern? Alas.

[datacipher]

I think many valid reasons were stated here, the most important being that Atari should have immediately produced the NEW biggies, Joust, Dig Dug, Stargate, Xevious, Tempest. Sinistar, etc etc etc... The initial line up of titles like Space invaders, breakout, etc was very lame, indeed i bought one for what was coming, not what was available.

 

Let me also add this small other localized problem. They didn't sell it in Canada! THEY DIDN"T SELL IT. (at least in our city/province) I had to go the US to get one, the only other person who got one was the only other serious gamer and friend, who also went to the states to get one. We only got carts when our parents would make a trip there and we could pick up a couple....

 

Other kids liked our 5200's but didnt' even know they existed until they played ours. FOr everyone else here, it was Colecovision, the only choice...