Pre-crash systems are slowly being forgotten.

[BassGuitari]

I am on ignore lists, that is so cool, people care.

Not mine, sorry. If I put you on my ignore list, I'd miss out on such amusing nuggets as this:

 

Mario Bros are.Atari console characters just like Donkey Kong is a Colecovision console character. From arcade to console. Sky Skipper as well, an original Atari CONSOLE game.

Anything to discredit Nintendo, eh?

 

Cosmac VIP / Chip8 ...

Now you're speaking my language!

[Newsdee]

Now you're speaking my language!

I've done my part in trying to get the new generation to experience Chip8/SuperChip8:

 

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/287105

 

I'm surprised it still runs ok in modern browsers (you might want to zoom in)... .

I spent quite a bit of time remapping the original controls to arrow keys and space.

Edited June 20, 2016 by Newsdee

[CatPix]

Mario Bros are.Atari console characters just like Donkey Kong is a Colecovision console character. From arcade to console. Sky Skipper as well, an original Atari CONSOLE game.

So Mario is a Philips character, and Pac Man is a Sony and Microsoft character?

 

And mickey Mouse belong to the French State since his first broadcast in French/france was on the government-owned channels.

Edited June 20, 2016 by CatPix

[malducci]

Nobody thinks Mario is an Atari character. I have no idea where you would get that idea from. Kids nowadays don't even know what Atari was. They know Mario as a Nintendo character, created by Miyamoto (if anything, because they read wiki sites).

[Schizophretard]

Nobody thinks Mario is an Atari character. I have no idea where you would get that idea from. Kids nowadays don't even know what Atari was. They know Mario as a Nintendo character, created by Miyamoto (if anything, because they read wiki sites).

 

I can see how someone would come to that kind of conclusion. For an example, I used to think that PAC-MAN was an Atari character since I saw him there first. I thought he was the mascot.

[CatPix]

Nobody thinks Mario is an Atari character. I have no idea where you would get that idea from. Kids nowadays don't even know what Atari was. They know Mario as a Nintendo character, created by Miyamoto (if anything, because they read wiki sites).

If you look back, high voltage tell his kids that Mario is an Atari character.

[atarilovesyou]

 

I can see how someone would come to that kind of conclusion. For an example, I used to think that PAC-MAN was an Atari character since I saw him there first. I thought he was the mascot.

 

...but the important part is that, once you found out more about Pac Man, you changed your erroneous assumption. Not everyone is capable of doing this, for a variety of reasons.

[Andromeda Stardust]

Perhaps we could start a list of games per system which are truly unique (no ports, no clones) and worth playing at least once. Obviously that criteria can be tough for some systems like the Cosmac VIP / Chip8 ... (altough the ant game is pretty funny)

Problem with making a "worth playing" list is everyone has a different idea of what's good. Even "bad" games have their fans. For example, Video Game Critic has a number of "F" reviews for games I actually had fun with. There were also a few highly critically acclaimed games I just couldn't get into.

 

It gets even worse in the NES era, with punishingly difficult games. An inexperienced gamer may consider these games frustrating, while those games that would be ideally suited for someone with little gaming experience (regardless of age), might be considered "for babies" by someone with more advanced skills.

 

= = = = = = = =

FYI, Pacman is Namco; Mario is Nintendo. Anyone claiming they are Atari characters because they first appeared on an Atari home console, is delusional. Donkey Kong / Mario Bros clearly had "Nintendo" plastered all over the bezel. Pacman / Ms Pacman was Midway, but only because they secured the distribution rights in the US.

[Schizophretard]

...but the important part is that, once you found out more about Pac Man, you changed your erroneous assumption. Not everyone is capable of doing this, for a variety of reasons.

I think it was because at the time I didn't consider who made a game as what defined a character and or game. I based it on the console. For an example, I thought of Super Mario Bros., Contra, Castlevania, etc. as all Nintendo games because I wasn't thinking in terms of first and third party games. I'm not even sure if I even knew the concept then and just seeing Nintendo's seal on them made it seem that in some way they were responsible for the games on the NES. It is kind of like how even now I don't think of movies in terms of the studios that make them. I just always have thought in terms of,"This movie was made for VHS, DVD, Blu-ray, etc." In other words, I default to thinking in terms of the platform and/or device content is for instead of where it is from.

[nd2003grad]

My two cents is that we need to move on past the nostalgia and the collector mentality to find and showcase those games that are truly worth remembering to the younger generations.

 

It's a bit like being a librarian or a curator. There's a lot of things to show but everybody would get bored with 10 of the same thing aligned in a row. Also in an era when somebody can get the whole collection of a system in an SD card that fell off a a truck, it's easy to miss some good stuff.

 

Perhaps we could start a list of games per system which are truly unique (no ports, no clones) and worth playing at least once. Obviously that criteria can be tough for some systems like the Cosmac VIP / Chip8 ... (altough the ant game is pretty funny)

I think this is a fantastic idea.

[Andromeda Stardust]

I think it was because at the time I didn't consider who made a game as what defined a character and or game. I based it on the console. For an example, I thought of Super Mario Bros., Contra, Castlevania, etc. as all Nintendo games because I wasn't thinking in terms of first and third party games. I'm not even sure if I even knew the concept then and just seeing Nintendo's seal on them made it seem that in some way they were responsible for the games on the NES. It is kind of like how even now I don't think of movies in terms of the studios that make them. I just always have thought in terms of,"This movie was made for VHS, DVD, Blu-ray, etc." In other words, I default to thinking in terms of the platform and/or device content is for instead of where it is from.

3rd party NES games always have a developer logo on the cart label and boxart. You can immediately tell for instance a game developed by Konami, Capcom etc by the presence of a logo. It also say "Licensed by Nintendo" somewhere on the cart. 1st party games just have the Nintendo logo on them without the "licensed by" subtext above it.

 

Unlicensed games usually have non-standard looking carts that say something along the lines of "For play on the NES. This game is not licensed, sponsored, or endorsed by Nintendo..."

 

Pirates, hacks, and repros are generally all over the place with very little consistency. I am generally against the misuse of the Seal of Quality on hacks, reproductions, or homebrews, but many repro makers building carts in their garage paste the logo into the label art anyway. This may cause confusion with future collectors who discover one of these carts in the wild.

 

 

I can see how someone would come to that kind of conclusion. For an example, I used to think that PAC-MAN was an Atari character since I saw him there first. I thought he was the mascot.

Atari had a lot of great games, but one thing they never had was an actual mascot of any kind. That is one reason among many I think hurt them tremendously during the great Nintendo/Sega console wars. Hell even NEC/Hudson had a mascot with the Bonk starring in his own series of platform games (and a SHMUP or two). He's no Sonic or Mario, but the games were sure as heck fun to play!

[malducci]

Atari had a lot of great games, but one thing they never had was an actual mascot of any kind. That is one reason among many I think hurt them tremendously during the great Nintendo/Sega console wars. Hell even NEC/Hudson had a mascot with the Bonk starring in his own series of platform games (and a SHMUP or two). He's no Sonic or Mario, but the games were sure as heck fun to play!

Only in the US. He was just a Hudson soft character, in which Hudson soft developed for other systems (in general and the character itself).

 

 

I can see how someone would come to that kind of conclusion. For an example, I used to think that PAC-MAN was an Atari character since I saw him there first. I thought he was the mascot.

For us old timers, sure. I mean, NES was my generation, but I still played pre NES stuff when I was younger (including arcades and computers). I thought Pac Man was Atari as well for quite a long time, but I know Mario Bros and Donkey Kong were Nintendo because the arcade had that logo on it, as well as the sticker packs (Donkey Kong sticker cards).

 

But my point, kids these days don't even know of those systems. They have no exposure to it. And wiki provides all they'll ever need (read that with a bit a snark). But Mario? He's soooo huge of an IP, that if someone did say that he was an Atari character and not a Nintendo character, kids would immediately call bullshit on it.

Edited June 21, 2016 by malducci

[Newsdee]

Problem with making a "worth playing" list is everyone has a different idea of what's good. Even "bad" games have their fans. For example, Video Game Critic has a number of "F" reviews for games I actually had fun with. There were also a few highly critically acclaimed games I just couldn't get into.

It gets even worse in the NES era, with punishingly difficult games. An inexperienced gamer may consider these games frustrating, while those games that would be ideally suited for someone with little gaming experience (regardless of age), might be considered "for babies" by someone with more advanced skills.

Yes, of course it starts off extremely subjective... but with different opinions one should still be able to mention *why* they are worth it. To take your example there could be ranking of most challenging games if you're into that sort of thing. Also I think limiting it per one system gives focus, otherwise we end up in platform wars.

 

I tried yesterday to go through a few Bally Astrocade games on my MiST. I have to admit the most fun ones were clones of arcade games (e.g. Wizard, Star Fortress). I guess I should go lurk in the dedicated forum to get recommendations

[Andromeda Stardust]

Arcade ports are always great to have on any system. One problem arises for gamers who collect multiple systems, what is the best home console port of arcade game X? Also some people when they become a fan of a game series will simply buy up every version of said game on each system it was released on. I am guilty of that with Pacman / Ms Pacman series. I even own a freaking Pacman 5200 but I don't have a 5200 to play it on.

 

My current top three favorites are "New Pacman" (2600 8k WIP homebrew), PMP 7800 Pacman Collection, PMP 7800 Jr Pacman, and my favorite official port is Tengen unlicensed Ms Pacman for NES. Win for homebrews; LOL!

[nd2003grad]

Yes, of course it starts off extremely subjective... but with different opinions one should still be able to mention *why* they are worth it. To take your example there could be ranking of most challenging games if you're into that sort of thing. Also I think limiting it per one system gives focus, otherwise we end up in platform wars.

 

I tried yesterday to go through a few Bally Astrocade games on my MiST. I have to admit the most fun ones were clones of arcade games (e.g. Wizard, Star Fortress). I guess I should go lurk in the dedicated forum to get recommendations

May I suggest you try our high score club? That's how I'm learning a lot of the games (I got my bally in January). There are a few real interesting games in there, including in BASIC. Treasure Cove is a very unique original that is probably the best looking Bally game.

[Keatah]

My two cents is that we need to move on past the nostalgia and the collector mentality to find and showcase those games that are truly worth remembering to the younger generations.

 

It's a bit like being a librarian or a curator. There's a lot of things to show but everybody would get bored with 10 of the same thing aligned in a row. Also in an era when somebody can get the whole collection of a system in an SD card that fell off a a truck, it's easy to miss some good stuff.

 

Yes. It's great to collect, I'm sure. But at the same time a collection should highlight the best of the best it has to offer, lest it get lost in the piles and jumble.

 

A stupid amount of material has already been archived - in many versions and formats.

 

While it is easy to visit any number of sites and get a whole collection. The next trick is to get matching documentation and scans and notes and manuals and photos. All that good stuff adds depth to any virtual collection. And the NEXT trick after that is to make it all easily accessible, yet in an easily updateable form which can also be migrated through the ages.

[Keatah]

Perhaps we could start a list of games per system which are truly unique (no ports, no clones) and worth playing at least once. Obviously that criteria can be tough for some systems like the Cosmac VIP / Chip8 ... (altough the ant game is pretty funny)

 

While there are many unique games per each platform - some are just plain uninspiring and essentially worthless outside of historical curiosity. Yes.

 

I believe that ports and clones must be included. I like the C64 and arcade versions of Gyruss for example. And it has ports on NES (which stinks) and Atari 400/800 (which is kinda-sorta ok).

 

Same think with like A2-FS1, it has ports to the TRS-80 and the PC. Yet it is significant on the Apple II.

 

So ports have to be included. And the proposed list is going to get huge real fast and fill up with things not everyone universally agrees upon. There's a hundred ways to digest the classics!

Edited June 21, 2016 by Keatah

[Andromeda Stardust]

 

And it has ports on NES (which stinks)

 

Gyrus on NES is not that bad. In fact I rather enjoyed it.

 

= = = = = = = =

 

One big issue is copyright and licensing hell. It will be decades before this stuff is in the public domain. There must be a LEGAL way to preserve games besides shady ROM download sites!

 

Think preservation is bad now, just wait until physical media dies and there's a metric ton of DRM attached to every download.

 

People will someday look back at former hackers and software "pirates" as cultural heroes.

[Newsdee]

So ports have to be included. And the proposed list is going to get huge real fast and fill up with things not everyone universally agrees upon. There's a hundred ways to digest the classics!

Perhaps there could be a separate category for notable arcade ports, which anyway were common for all these early systems. Maybe another category for ports from another system.

 

I mean, of course the choice of "top 10/50/100" will be subjective, but I feel we can break it down into objective criteria at least. Those criteria would show why one might want to check a system.

[danwinslow]

When I was a youth of 10 or 11 or so, I had a friend whose dad was a ham radio guy. He would have these meets over at his house, where a bunch of ancient guys would come over and talk for hours about crystal radios and ham operations and like how cool Morse code was and tap things out to each other. I remember thinking, 'My GOD these guys are lame. That stuff is sooooo boring, why are they into it? I'm glad I live in the modern age with cool stuff like atari's and sinclairs!". Inside I swore that I'd never wind up all old and obsessed with ancient tech like these guys were.

 

So. Here I am, all old and obsessed with ancient tech

[Guest LiqMat]

When I was a youth of 10 or 11 or so, I had a friend whose dad was a ham radio guy. He would have these meets over at his house, where a bunch of ancient guys would come over and talk for hours about crystal radios and ham operations and like how cool Morse code was and tap things out to each other. I remember thinking, 'My GOD these guys are lame. That stuff is sooooo boring, why are they into it? I'm glad I live in the modern age with cool stuff like atari's and sinclairs!". Inside I swore that I'd never wind up all old and obsessed with ancient tech like these guys were.

 

So. Here I am, all old and obsessed with ancient tech

 

The fun part, though, is taking this "ancient" tech and applying it for modern purposes. The stream of modern homebrew games for these old platforms are amazing and keep them very much alive. Some of the modern homebrew titles are, IMO, better than the original pre-crash titles. Piggy Bank for the Intellivision being one I love that came out just last year.

 

Not pre-crash, but as an electronic musician the fact I can purchase a Sega Genesis or Master System VST plugin as a virtual synth using a perfectly emulated Yamaha YM2612 or PSG is just amazing:

 

Genesis VST:

 

https://youtu.be/wU4COz6Gc4U?list=RDwU4COz6Gc4U

 

Master System VST:

 

Edited June 21, 2016 by LiqMat

[high voltage]

Somebody above got it right, all games released for Atari VCS were Atari games, way back in the early 80s. Nintendo was nobody, totally unknown. You've seen the name on the box in tiny writing, like ok, those guys wrote the game for Atari or Parker Bros, that's all, it's an Atari game. Yes Pac-Man was an Atari game too. We had no arcades in our neighbourhood, so I never visited those.The overall knowledge of video gaming was different. Most of those NES guys don't understand this, fair enough.....

Edited June 21, 2016 by high voltage

[Kurt_Woloch]

Well, as for the pre-crash games... I have some myself, the TI-99 and the Atari 2600. One problem nowadays with them is TV output... they both broadcast an RF signal in a TV standard which is now obsolete and probably won't even be supported by future TV's anymore. Also the electronics are slowly dying... I can't manage to get a sharp picture from my TI-99 anymore, had to give up my original C-64 because the on/off switch doesn't work anymore and before that there were already some hiccups with its sound chip. Therefore I'm now slowly working on backing up all the precious material (all software and data I've created myself on those systems, and then on the Amiga after I'm done with the others), planning to eventually give away the systems in some form. This has only started about 2-3 years ago, before which I still viewed those systems as a viable option to play some old games. Now the TI-99 and the Atari 2600 were some of the most popular pre-crash systems, and there have been more obscure ones, both consoles and computers, which may fall even deeper in obscurity and, in fact, some of them would be even unknown to me if it wasn't for the Internet.

 

As for which character is whose company's character... I'm seeing this a bit differently. Back then, for me Pac-Man was an arcade character (I didn't care about Namco making the machines), even if the game was ported to all imaginable systems. Likewise Donkey Kong was an arcade character rather than a Nintendo character (although in the arcade we actually only got the "Crazy Kong" version). However, Mario WAS a Nintendo character since his first appearance actually was the Game & Watch game "Mario Bros." which was manufactured by Nintendo, as was the arcade game with the same name... by then I had recognized Nintendo as a game manufacturer. Remember that even though Mario actually first appeared in Donkey Kong, he didn't get his name back then, and even if he did, his name was insignificant for the people writing the German manual for the Game & Watch game Donkey Kong, because in the German manual he was renamed to Paul. Other companies like Namco or Konami only emerged to me during the following years, a bit contrary to third-party manufacturers like Activision or Parker Brothers.

[Schizophretard]

3rd party NES games always have a developer logo on the cart label and boxart. You can immediately tell for instance a game developed by Konami, Capcom etc by the presence of a logo. It also say "Licensed by Nintendo" somewhere on the cart. 1st party games just have the Nintendo logo on them without the "licensed by" subtext above it.

 

Unlicensed games usually have non-standard looking carts that say something along the lines of "For play on the NES. This game is not licensed, sponsored, or endorsed by Nintendo..."

 

Pirates, hacks, and repros are generally all over the place with very little consistency. I am generally against the misuse of the Seal of Quality on hacks, reproductions, or homebrews, but many repro makers building carts in their garage paste the logo into the label art anyway. This may cause confusion with future collectors who discover one of these carts in the wild.

 

Atari had a lot of great games, but one thing they never had was an actual mascot of any kind. That is one reason among many I think hurt them tremendously during the great Nintendo/Sega console wars. Hell even NEC/Hudson had a mascot with the Bonk starring in his own series of platform games (and a SHMUP or two). He's no Sonic or Mario, but the games were sure as heck fun to play!

 

I know all of this now but back then I didn't think in terms of publishers. It was a foreign concept. To me a game made for the NES was a Nintendo game, a game made for the Atari 2600 was an Atari game, etc. If you asked me back then,"But who made these games?" I probably would have answered,"Santa's elves because I asked him for them at the mall and then they were under the Christmas tree."

[+phoenixdownita]

 

I know all of this now but back then I didn't think in terms of publishers. It was a foreign concept. To me a game made for the NES was a Nintendo game, a game made for the Atari 2600 was an Atari game, etc. If you asked me back then,"But who made these games?" I probably would have answered,"Santa's elves because I asked him for them at the mall and then they were under the Christmas tree."

That was only you though and obviously that younger you was wrong, period. I think you can admit to that now all grown up and such

 

I remember owning an MSX and be well aware of Konami games, they were the bomb. Never thought of them as "MSX games" per se.

Same applies to the rest. Never thought that the C64 games were Commodore games, I actually cared of who made them and sometimes actually who ported them (some ports were atrocious to no faults of the originals)

Later on, when owning and Amiga it was fun to see what utter junk would come out from the likes of U.S.Gold and other "labels", never really blamed Commodore for that. But I was longing for Psygnosis and Cinemaware releases knowing that something good was cooking all the time (well most of the time anyway).

I can still see the brick wall at the beginning of "Defender of the Crown" with the changing color letters of the title .... amazing