What is it about Atari?

[glazball]

I remember being at a friend's house in the early 80s during the peak of the 2600's popularity, when EVERYONE had an Atari. His family had a Channel F that they no longer played and it sat there on the floor in another room, forgotten. To my mind at the time, without really knowing what it was, I looked down at the weird console as the ugly, primitive video game system that no one in their right mind would want to play anymore - only that it was a stepping stone to the current good games: Frogger, Space Invaders, Berzerk, etc etc

 

I believe that many people who grew up after the Video Game Crash look back at Atari the same way (and have no idea what a Channel F is). Ataris were the ugly, primitive, wood-grained clunkers that people used to play before the "good games" (ie Super Mario Bros and everything that followed) and aren't worth wasting much time and money on nowadays.

[MrBeefy]

I am predominantly an NES kid. However I did play a decent chunk of Atari when I was younger.

 

Atari suffers from many thing.

 

Graphics: Lets face it. Even just compared to the SNES, and nothing further, it looks archaic so it can be an eyesore. NES was so much better looking and even when compared to the 7800 there is very little comparison. BBCQ is maybe the one game that excels. Double Dragon isn't comparable. Even compared to its arcade counterparts it isn't as good.

 

Gameplay: Arcade games are good, but have their limits. NES really started the platforming and had good variety. Not all of their arcade games were accurate representations but got closer graphics wise.

 

Manual: while some NES games you need it, they are way easier to play without reading it. There are atari games that I still have to reference the manual even though I have played them. Without the manual or logging into someplace like AtariAge to read it it doesn't make sense.

 

While being more simple, Atari games are not always intuitive when it comes on how to play them. That leaves huge room for people to not understand or think it is dumb.

 

With being born in 84 I feel like I'm around a good age to bridge both systems. Do I think the NES is better? Yes. Mainly because Atari's games are more awesome in the arcade. There is Pitfall, River Raid, Adventure, but not like there are on the NES (that aren't better in the arcade).

 

Don't hate me. I do love my Atari and at my gaming bday we did play it more than my NES. My friend was blown away by Draconian and that the Atari could have an RPG like Dungeon!

[high voltage]

I am predominantly an NES kid. However I did play a decent chunk of Atari when I was younger.

 

Atari suffers from many thing.

 

Graphics: Lets face it. Even just compared to the SNES, and nothing further, it looks archaic so it can be an eyesore. NES was so much better looking and even when compared to the 7800 there is very little comparison. BBCQ is maybe the one game that excels. Double Dragon isn't comparable. Even compared to its arcade counterparts it isn't as good.

 

Gameplay: Arcade games are good, but have their limits. NES really started the platforming and had good variety. Not all of their arcade games were accurate representations but got closer graphics wise.

 

Manual: while some NES games you need it, they are way easier to play without reading it. There are atari games that I still have to reference the manual even though I have played them. Without the manual or logging into someplace like AtariAge to read it it doesn't make sense.

 

While being more simple, Atari games are not always intuitive when it comes on how to play them. That leaves huge room for people to not understand or think it is dumb.

 

With being born in 84 I feel like I'm around a good age to bridge both systems. Do I think the NES is better? Yes. Mainly because Atari's games are more awesome in the arcade. There is Pitfall, River Raid, Adventure, but not like there are on the NES (that aren't better in the arcade).

 

Don't hate me. I do love my Atari and at my gaming bday we did play it more than my NES. My friend was blown away by Draconian and that the Atari could have an RPG like Dungeon!

 

Nes kid, nice you're comparing a 2nd gen console with a 3rd gen console (and even the Snes), goes to show on how well the Atari VCS is holding up.

 

Let's see:

Graphics: A console designed in 1977 to play Pong and Tank games, the 2600 evolved immensely, check out game like Solaris, for example

 

Gameplay: Nes started the platform gaming? VCS: Pitfall 1 and 2, Miner 2049er 1 and 2, HERO. Montezumas Revenge. Nintendo arcade titles like Mario Bros, Sky Skipper, Popeye. Available FIRST on Atari VCS.

 

Manual: Most kids managed very well succeeding playing VCS game without reading the manual (Maybe you're just saying they were clever kids). For me, it was part of the game reading the manual, it actually told a story.

 

As for simple Atari games? You're saying you gotta read the manual when playing Atari, and then you're saying they are simple? Make up your mind. Anyway, simple games? Tried some RPGs on VCS, eg Dragonstomper?

 

Do you think that the NES is better? It would be a sad affair for Nintendo if a 1983 released console wouldn't be more advanced (well, better looking games anyway) than a console realised in 1977. A comparison with other 3rd gen consoles would've been more appropriate, eg the Atari 5200, Colecovision (and yes, as many magazines like EG mentioned, those two consoles are 3rd gen).

[louisg]

What game is that with the bouncing ball at about 0:21 ??

 

That's the volleyball game on Video Olympics, one of my favorites!

[pacman000]

"Gameplay: Nes started the platform gaming? VCS: Pitfall 1 and 2, Miner 2049er 1 and 2, HERO. Montezumas Revenge. Nintendo arcade titles like Mario Bros, Sky Skipper, Popeye. Available FIRST on Atari VCS."

 

Indeed. The NES advanced gaming, but its advancements were evolutionary, not revolutionary.

Edited July 12, 2018 by pacman000

[Flojomojo]

I'll bet there's a good car analogy out there, but I am not knowledgeable enough to find it. I figured the Atari could be like the Ford Model T ... https://www.motortrend.com/news/15-cars-that-shaped-the-ford-motor-company/

 

funny to think that Atari 2600 sold twice as many units as that historic thing.

[theor]

Let's see:

Graphics: A console designed in 1977 to play Pong and Tank games, the 2600 evolved immensely, check out game like Solaris, for example

 

It was actually designed between 1975 and 1976. The first microprocessor, the 4004, had just been invented. Everything else used TTL logic.

 

I don't think MrBeefy realizes what a prowess the 2600 was in the mid 70s. CPU, RAM, ROM, cartridge... we take that for granted, but the 2600 was the first machine to bring that on the table, 43 years ago. It was science fiction come true.

http://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/computer-games/16/185/758

 

It was such a novel machine that not much off-the-shelve electronic existed to support it. The TIA was more or less the first graphic chip ever (although a few mainframes had some dedicated circuity) and had to be prototyped using wirewraped TTL on breadboards, as seen above. Science fiction come true.

 

The 2600 started it all, everything about it is unique. The NES, meh... The engineers tossed together a few existing chips and voila. Nothing fancy about it.

[theor]

Also, back in1975, the state of the art in "game programs" was Pong and Tank (Combat), so that's what the 2600 was designed for. Games like Space Invaders wouldn't happen until three years later.

 

When the NES arrived, pretty much everything had already been invented, they just had to throw some hardware to handle it. There's no possible comparison, and yet because of its RAM-less video hardware, the 2600 managed to successfully implement 4 way scrolling and features from games released 10 years later. I'm still in awe when I think about it.

[MrBeefy]

 

Nes kid, nice you're comparing a 2nd gen console with a 3rd gen console (and even the Snes), goes to show on how well the Atari VCS is holding up.

 

Let's see:

Graphics: A console designed in 1977 to play Pong and Tank games, the 2600 evolved immensely, check out game like Solaris, for example

 

Gameplay: Nes started the platform gaming? VCS: Pitfall 1 and 2, Miner 2049er 1 and 2,

HERO. Montezumas Revenge.

Nintendo arcade titles like Mario Bros, Sky Skipper, Popeye. Available FIRST on Atari VCS.

 

Manual: Most kids managed very well succeeding playing VCS game without reading the manual (Maybe you're just saying they were clever kids). For me, it was part of the game reading the manual, it actually told a story.

 

As for simple Atari games? You're saying you gotta read the manual when playing Atari, and then you're saying they are simple? Make up your mind. Anyway, simple games? Tried some RPGs on VCS, eg Dragonstomper?

 

Do you think that the NES is better? It would be a sad affair for Nintendo if a 1983 released console wouldn't be more advanced (well, better looking games anyway) than a console realised in 1977. A comparison with other 3rd gen consoles would've been more appropriate, eg the Atari 5200, Colecovision (and yes, as many magazines like EG mentioned, those two consoles are 3rd gen).

Got to remember the OP. Atari and its stigma. As hard as it is getting to find Atari 2600 in the wild it is even harder and rarer to find 5200 and 7800 games.

 

1. Graphics: sure Solaris is nice but not a majority of the 2600 games look that way. Why the need for so many PacMan 2600 homebrews?

 

2. I love Pitfall, and either Pitfall 2 or Hero are probably the best. I am sorry but the Miner games kind of suck. I do need to play Montezumas though.

 

Nintendo having arcade games on the Atari means nothing. Super Mario Bros was not awesome because the arcade was ported on the 2600.

 

Actually I never understood why the original Pitfall was remembered so much more than the sequel. Now yes there are platforms on the Atari but not kicked up like they were on the NES.

 

3.Manual: Yes it is a lost 'art form'. I work in education and give people stuff to read and you know what they don't. That is why there are no manuals anymore. All taught in game.

 

I agree reading a manual is part of the fun. You can figure out a lot of things without the manual but there are things like game variations/difficulty switches that aren't always intuitive without the manual.

 

Now going back to the original post. Most games in the wild do not have manuals. Heck i like Yars it is fun, but you have to eat a dot to fire the cannon? Sure you can figure that out when messing around but is that what the average gamer wants to do?

 

So gameplay/graphics might be simple but that doesn't mean the gameplay makes sense without that piece of the puzzle. If you had never played Dragonstomper before would you know what exactly you are doing? Needing instructions does not negate the fact it can be simple. Nor does it mean it isn't complex.

 

Star Raiders I think is simple. However, if I didn't know what it was, nor have the manual, would I know I need a keypad? Being new to the Atari and finding that in the wild without the keypad would suck for that person. Lol

 

I will say that Atari games have an interesting mix of complexity. It is like simple gameplay but can make zero sense if you don't know what you are doing.

 

4. Reason I picked NES is because of the original post. If they do thatbwith 2600 games there will most likely be no 5200 nor ColecoVision games.

 

Heck I wish I could find more 2600 and 7800 games. I asked my local retrogame store if they were going to carry the Retron77 and they said yes. When I asked if that means they will start to carry Atari games they said no.

 

If I had a retro store I would carry Atari games, but I know that they would sit for a long time. Even if I didn't put dumb prices on them.

 

Don't get me wrong I love my Atari and have bought more games for it in recent history. Unfortunately, it just isn't as accessible (5200, CV, INTV, 7800 are all similar in that regard) and is misunderstood because there is some depth to the system.

[MrBeefy]

I don't think MrBeefy realizes what a prowess the 2600 was in the mid 70s. CPU, RAM, ROM, cartridge... we take that for granted, but the 2600 was the first machine to bring that on the table, 43 years ago. It was science

It was such a novel machine that not much off-the-shelve electronic existed to support it. The TIA was more or less the first graphic chip ever (although a few mainframes had some dedicated circuity) and had to be prototyped using wirewraped TTL on breadboards, as seen above. Science fiction come true.

 

Oh I get it trust me I do. My comments are directed more at the original post

 

--I Asked the guy working there if they had any Atari games, and he said "Oh yeah, a lot... then he said, "We don't take Atari seriously. We keep them on hand because we're a retro game store, and it looks good to have them, but we probably only sell an Atari game once every six months or so."--

 

This^^ My retro game stop doesn't carry any pre-NES. Why? Don't sell. When they use to I know I was the only guy picking some up because they commented on it.

 

--All of the sudden I had a flash back to 1988 in the six grade when a Nintendo kid made fun of me for wearing an Atari t-shirt.--

 

This^^^ Doesn't matter if it was first or innovative and the comparison to NES comes from the simple fact that people know the NES and the 2600. Everything in between is obscure to most people. That isn't factoring in that ET is blamed for the crash lol. In comparison the 2600 looks rough and is easily misunderstood.

 

I am probably weird because I played on the 2600 JR and 7800 for years before we got our NES.

 

2600 is a misunderstood system by those who have never really played it. Also there is something else that I think hurts the Atari today. It has a ton of Arcade ports. It was the "bringing the arcade home" system. It was awesome and innovative then. However, try to look at it from a younger generation. Everyone can easily play the actual Arcade games through emulation. Then this younger generation looks at the 2600 and sees something that looks worse than the actual arcade games. A majority of gamers (younger obviously) didn't get to experience how innovative it was to basically have a way to play those arcade games.

 

Semi-related does anyone know how many games on the 2600 there would be if you took away all the arcade ports? (I don't know just curious.

 

On a side note for my bday we played videogames ranging from 2600 to XboxOne. Draconian looked better than the N64...those first gen 3d have not aged well. The homebrews I had floored one of my friends.

[Lord Thag]

2600 is a misunderstood system by those who have never really played it

 

^^^This

 

With all the 'omg ET is the woooooost!' internet meme crap, primitive graphics etc, most people wont give it a chance.

 

The VCS is like that funky looking/dressing/acting person that everyone around you avoids because they are weird that, if you spend more than ten minutes with, is easily the most interesting/attractive person in the room, once you get to know them.

 

You have to PLAY it to understand, which is why Atariage has been such a strong site. We get it, because we play all this stuff.

 

I've introduced tons of gamers over the years to it. Younger people are always resistant. Then you play Warlords, Indy 500, Sprintmaster, Pitfall II or Moonsweeper or whatever and it's suddenly 2:00am and they have to take a break to browse ebay to find a console.

 

Once you play it, you get it... but until then, it's like your grandpa's 1972 answering machine: ancient, weird, and laughable to anyone under 35.

[MrBeefy]

 

^^^This

 

With all the 'omg ET is the woooooost!' internet meme crap, primitive graphics etc, most people wont give it a chance.

 

The VCS is like that funky looking/dressing/acting person that everyone around you avoids because they are weird that, if you spend more than ten minutes with, is easily the most interesting/attractive person in the room, once you get to know them.

 

You have to PLAY it to understand, which is why Atariage has been such a strong site. We get it, because we play all this stuff.

 

I've introduced tons of gamers over the years to it. Younger people are always resistant. Then you play Warlords, Indy 500, Sprintmaster, Pitfall II or Moonsweeper or whatever and it's suddenly 2:00am and they have to take a break to browse ebay to find a console.

 

Once you play it, you get it... but until then, it's like your grandpa's 1972 answering machine: ancient, weird, and laughable to anyone under 35.

Yeah when I got my friend to sit down and I popped in homebrews he was like, "holey shit Atari 2600 can do this?" We them talked some about how things would have been different if the same type of games could have been done back in the day.

 

Warlords is probably a great introduction. Party games are great.

 

I introduced Human Cannonball to my wife and we use to play it like beer pong so its a house favorite. Lol

 

But hell people at my retro game store doesn't know about this site. Homebrews or whatever. I hate that. I took a student a few hours away to try and get their GED. While they were testing I found a place that had a few 2600 games. So happy to finally have midnight magic in my collection!

 

We played Goldeneye on N64 that night too. We had fun but I would argue that Atari's simple graphics stand up better than a lot of ps1 and n64 3d games. But yeah most dont want to give it a chance.

 

My mom use to have Pitfall memorized and would get pissed if she got hit by a log. Good times.

Edited July 13, 2018 by MrBeefy

[louisg]

Oh you mentioned Warlords. That's the game that's always hooked my friends who otherwise wouldn't give Atari a chance. The room goes from "Why are we playing this system?" to "Let's do another match!" real quick with that game

[Lord Thag]

Oh you mentioned Warlords. That's the game that's always hooked my friends who otherwise wouldn't give Atari a chance. The room goes from "Why are we playing this system?" to "Let's do another match!" real quick with that game

Yeah, nothing beats warlords/medieval mayhem for convincing people how fun the Atari can be.Atari is immediately accessible and fun, and you don't have long periods of down time or the need to invest hours to get anywhere.

 

We call what we play on Atari and what we play on PS4/XB1 'video games', but really, the modern stuff is more akin to interactive movies/tv, whereas Atari has more in common with traditional games like checkers or poker: small, self contained games with simple rules whose complexity comes from how the rules play out. It's a very different animal than the movie-like action games we play now.

 

Which makes it much easier to cram into a busy day. I find it's an easy sell because of that, especially to busy adults. The easy availability of the Flashback also helps get people into it too.

[Love Cowboy]

 

We call what we play on Atari and what we play on PS4/XB1 'video games', but really, the modern stuff is more akin to interactive movies/tv, whereas Atari has more in common with traditional games like checkers or poker: small, self contained games with simple rules whose complexity comes from how the rules play out. It's a very different animal than the movie-like action games we play now.

 

Which makes it much easier to cram into a busy day. I find it's an easy sell because of that, especially to busy adults. The easy availability of the Flashback also helps get people into it too.

 

This right here is exactly why I don't have a current gen system and hardly ever play games on my PS3. Current-gen and last-gen games just don't jive with responsible adult life. If I only have an hour at a time to play, and the first real gameplay is about that far in, I'll never even get into a game

[Flojomojo]

[retrogoober]

Why I play Atari

 

1. Its what I refer to as 'antique gaming' - I view the VCS as the first widely popular home console, 'archaic' by todays standards, but that makes it about going back to the roots of video gaming, its doesnt get ANY more elemental than ONE stick, ONE button, and just enough technology to finally create a digital gaming experience, that is fun to me. My point is historical in ways, I love to look at the innovation involved, what programmers and engineers were able to do given limitations of the time, right up to watching our brilliant homebrew programmers stepping up to the challenge. BUT in IMO, inherently what we do with the VCS and modern consoles as far as brain/dexterity activity IS the same at the core, its just graphics are so much 'better', BUT when it comes down to it we are still using a controller device to aim electrons on a screen to a certain target to accomplish a goal, on some level in my mind it is NO different now than then, sure perhaps more complex but not necessarily more challenging, 1 button versus 8, 1 joy versus 2. And I guess I use the phrase 'antique gaming' in that the antique community uses 30 years as a benchmark, and the VCS is older than that.

 

2. Score based - I like when scores mattered, I find it more stimulating, and enjoy having a numerical benchmark, not just depth progress, more mathematical

 

3. Arcade Gameplay - I do like the 'pick up and play' aspect of arcade gameplay, a quick 5-10 minute fix and game can be over, plus its based in the first games I fell in love with in the arcades, the VCS is in my mind a direct response to the arcade boom, and it is in the games

 

4. Nostalgia - so I think my brain is conditioned to enjoy the console, as I was seriously teased/deprived as a child:) I wanted a 2600 SO bad at 9, ALL my friends had one, its all I talked about XMas 82, so on XMas morning I woke to.................an Odyssey 2:( Mom would later tell me the nice man at Roses talked her out of the 2600 in favor of the Odyssey 2 because it had a keyboard and was edumcational. I sure got an education, on life and how things can work. PLUS my Mom was one of those parents who wouldnt buy more games "you already have 3, play those! You dont need any more" *scarred* LOL. So NOW when I play 2600, my brain releases chemicals that have stored for many years, its like a neurotransmitter dump:)

 

5. Abstraction/Imagination - Modern games tell you what the experience is, it is literally rendered for you. The wonderful blocky 'simple' graphics use your brain in a different way, the experience is 'projective', you can see anything in the experience, back in the day our minds seethed with what was 'actually' happening in Adventure, what a Yar looked like varied from player to player (regardless of the label haha). I had a dream last night about Galactopus. He saved my life and then gave me a hundred dollar bill. LOVE how the box/manual/cart art fueled the experience, same as old vinyl.

Edited July 13, 2018 by retrogoober

[louisg]

 

This right here is exactly why I don't have a current gen system and hardly ever play games on my PS3. Current-gen and last-gen games just don't jive with responsible adult life. If I only have an hour at a time to play, and the first real gameplay is about that far in, I'll never even get into a game

 

That's why I love arcade games so much. Lately, I've been playing a lot of Horizon Chase and recently picked up Darius Burst and Road Redemption when they were on sale. And I mean to get back into Alltynex Second. Quick-play arcade style games are still made! They just don't get lots of exposure.

[Keatah]

 

That's the volleyball game on Video Olympics, one of my favorites!

 

Shit, how could I not have remembered that. I used to think it stupidly hilarious trapping the ball between the "paddle" and the ground. to us kids at the time it took skilz to do that!

[Keatah]

4. Nostalgia - so I think my brain is conditioned to enjoy the console, as I was seriously teased/deprived as a child:) I wanted a 2600 SO bad at 9, ALL my friends had one, its all I talked about XMas 82, so on XMas morning I woke to.................an Odyssey 2:( Mom would later tell me the nice man at Roses talked her out of the 2600 in favor of the Odyssey 2 because it had a keyboard and was edumcational. I sure got an education, on life and how things can work. PLUS my Mom was one of those parents who wouldnt buy more games "you already have 3, play those! You dont need any more" *scarred* LOL. So NOW when I play 2600, my brain releases chemicals that have stored for many years, its like a neurotransmitter dump:)

 

There were times I told my parents to shut up and go get me more games. If they didn't, I wasn't doing my homework anymore (not that I did much of it in the first place). Sometimes I was like that kid on Dr. Phil that punched his mom in the face.

 

If they told me a game was "educational" I told them I would GIVE them an education in raising kids and went out caused some sort of local disturbance. Just enough. You know?

[Lord Thag]

 

This right here is exactly why I don't have a current gen system and hardly ever play games on my PS3. Current-gen and last-gen games just don't jive with responsible adult life. If I only have an hour at a time to play, and the first real gameplay is about that far in, I'll never even get into a game

Yeah, exactly. I still play modern stuff (mainly the occasional Elder Scrolls game, and indie steam stuff), but a lot of the time, I just don't have the time/energy to devote to it.

 

But, say, Jr Pac Man, Moonsweeper, or Gravitar on the 2600... are instantly challenging and fun. You get a lot more actual gameplay in the same hour's time, with no filler, no cut scenes, and no waiting.

[MrMaddog]

I believe that many people who grew up after the Video Game Crash look back at Atari the same way (and have no idea what a Channel F is). Ataris were the ugly, primitive, wood-grained clunkers that people used to play before the "good games" (ie Super Mario Bros and everything that followed) and aren't worth wasting much time and money on nowadays.

 

I wonder if that's how modern gamers who grew up with Playstation & Xbox games see the NES/SNES the same way?

 

(or at least "quaint retro" in the case of the NES minis)

[Osgeld]

 

The 2600 started it all

 

 

except for the channel F, which did everything atari did first... except succeed

[Gentlegamer]

Tank Pong is the greatest game ever made.

[MrBeefy]

 

I wonder if that's how modern gamers who grew up with Playstation & Xbox games see the NES/SNES the same way?

 

(or at least "quaint retro" in the case of the NES minis)

I think they hold up a little better. I think the demand of the minis point to that.

 

I think the main thing they would find is how it seems like on average the older games are harder. I love the New Super Mario series of games, however, losing all lives is never a worry in them.