Jump to content
IGNORED

Later 2600 games aka "The things that should not be"


envytomdead2

Recommended Posts

I have to say I love the mid to late 80's 2600 games. Kung Fu  Master, Commando, Solaris, Ikari Warriors, Double Dragon (yes, Double Dragon), Desert Falcon, Rampage, Xenophobe, etc. I know a lot of people felt these should have never been made but I contend that if they came out in early 80's they would be looked upon more favorably. I originally had a 7800 and around 87/88,  there were virtually no NES style games for it. I remember getting Kung Fu Master for the 2600, I was so thrilled to have a NES style game.

 

What is everyone else's thoughts? Love them? Hate them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, envytomdead2 said:

I have to say I love the mid to late 80's 2600 games. Kung Fu  Master, Commando, Solaris, Ikari Warriors, Double Dragon (yes, Double Dragon), Desert Falcon, Rampage, Xenophobe, etc. I know a lot of people felt these should have never been made 

 

Who are these people of whom you speak? Solaris is an outright classic, and Xenophobe is an amazing (albeit ugly looking) piece of programming. Okay, Rampage looks like a kindergarten art project, and Desert Falcon is unfortunate, but companies (and Atari) had learned by the late '80s and were producing some pretty great stuff for the 2600. Not nearly as amazing as today's efforts, of course, but still pretty great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Positive surprise?  They never quit making games until the early Nineties, now they weren't making that many in 1985 and 1986, but they never totally stopped, and even if they did the previous games were still available in stores (as they still are now but on websites.)  The Redbox games were the last hurrah, but that was the longest era, and longest look,  1986-1992, which were available during the NES era.  The NES was ascending during this time, as the VCS was descending.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally love the late-80s/early-90s titles. I tend to be intrigued by 'late' releases on any console, but my fondness for the 2600, coupled with the very fact that a 1977 system was still seeing new product even as the 16-bit era had dawned, well, I'm just endlessly fascinated by the whole thing. Sure, some of the games are probably more interesting in a demake, "hey, this shouldn't exist!" kinda way, but others are impressive, fun, genuinely good games; not only welcome additions to the 2600 library as a whole but they also, perhaps surprisingly, do a good job of at least scratching the surface of then-current gameplay styles. (That's to say, River Raid II technically fits better in the late-80s gaming scene than River Raid does, even if, I feel, it can't begin to touch the original in the fun department.)

 

A few thoughts:

 

- Xenophobe is a top 10 favorite of mine for the 2600. Not only do I just find it a lot of fun, but the lower-grade visuals and sound actually, to me, make it feel like a more desolate and desperate situation than the bright, comical look of the coin-op and other home ports. It's too bad the simultaneous two-player gameplay had to be chopped (despite what the back of the box implies, it's two-players alternating only), but that only adds to the isolated feel of the proceedings.

 

- Not that there are a ton of them anyway, but Ikari Warriors gets my vote for best top-down run n' gun on the console, and that's coming from someone who easily prefers Commando between the two in pretty much any other circumstance. Just a real fun arcade conversion that's better than it has any right to be, IMO. (2600 Ikari Warriors may very well find it's way into my personal top 10 on the console, as well.)

 

Oh, and regarding those two aforementioned titles, thanks to the Venezuela find, what were once pretty rare games in the NTSC format are now easily obtainable new & sealed!

 

- I like that Atari took the time to put out some new, improved sports games. Okay, sure, Super Baseball is just a modified Realsports Baseball (neither are very good, but luckily Absolute's Pete Rose Baseball, while certainly not perfect, at least better attempted to get with the times), but Super Football was an unbelievably advanced then-new product for the console. That vantage point, those scaling players/goalposts/etc.; just incredible! I consider it easily the best football game on the 2600, and one that's infinitely superior to the embarrassment that was Touchdown Football on the 7800, as well. (I also like the black background, which to me suggests a night game on a cold fall/winter night - evocative!)

 

And then there's Double Dunk, which, unless you count the variations in Video Olympics, is only the second basketball game to grace the 2600 - some 11 years after the first! (Unless I'm forgetting another one? The unreleased Realsports Basketball doesn't count IMO, so...?) While I don't think it tops the 1978 Basketball in the pure fun department (there's something to be said for that straight-ahead, one-on-one simplicity), Double Dunk certainly isn't bad, but what's more impressive to me is that it manages to attain something of an actual attitude; those funky beats, the break dancing characters, the blacktop setting, the between-game lingo ("Jammin'!"), the gritty 'streetball' vibe of the whole thing, it all manages to capture a feel of the late-80s/early-90s in a way that you simply wouldn't expect of a 2600 game.

 

Also, props to Realsports Boxing. I would guess that most people prefer Activision's earlier Boxing, and while I can definitely understand that, I do think Atari's entry is plenty worthwhile. Okay, yeah, RSB is pretty button-mashy, I know. But nevertheless, I think it's fast and furious and fun, and that roaring crowd in the darkened arena evokes the aura of the sport in a way that Activision's game, to me, just doesn't - even if the Activision game is technically better from a pure gameplay standpoint. (Also, it's interesting that RSB was the only new title in the Realsports line to carry over from Atari Inc. to Atari Corp. I wonder why they decided to have one more entry in the line instead of just giving it a new, more eye-catching name not unlike their other updated sports games?)

 

- Speaking of Activision, the post-crash Activision tends to get a lot more flack than the pre-crash Activision. It's no secret as to why, but the shift in direction to mostly coin-op ports (divisive ones at that!) provides for, I feel, some really fascinating stuff. Kung-Fu Master is a lot of fun, and while the one-button limitation takes some getting used to, I don't know why the game seems to get lumped in with the other two, more notorious ports, which I'll get to momentarily. To me, KFM on the 2600 compares surprisingly well to the NES version!

 

Rampage: now truth be told, I don't much care for any version of Rampage; it's alright for a few levels, but it gets repetitive fast, and the admittedly-mega-cool concept isn't enough to carry the game the whole way (IMO). Still, if there's a version of it I'd consider my favorite, it would be the 2600 port - mainly because of the whole demake feeling I mentioned at the start of this post. Rampage shouldn't exist on the 2600 - but it does! Like 2600 Kung-Fu Master, I'm a little confused by comments tearing into it, stating it's one of the worst on the console, etc. etc. etc. Sure, it's pretty ugly, but like KFM, it plays okay, considering you've only got a single button to work with. Unless I'm just totally forgetting something, all the major aspects of the coin-op are represented. It's just that the flaws inherent to the original game are, erm, present in the 2600 version, too.

 

Annnnnnnd then there's Double Dragon for the 2600. Talk about a divisive game! Some folks (understandably) despise it, while others can see the positives in what was, to say the least, an ill-advised decision to port the game to the 2600. I'm in the latter group; I don't think anyone, myself included, would say it's a flawless game or a definitive port. BUT, I don't think it's the total train wreck it's often claimed to be, either. Graphically and musically it's very good, even terrific, for the 2600. It attempted to port all four missions from the arcade over (they're lacking the interactivity and personality of the coin-op, but hey, at least they're there). And it even managed, with a bit of a cheat, to get the simultaneous two-player action in - which actually puts it one up on the NES version! For those reasons alone, I think 2600 DD is automatically disqualified from the usual "one of the absolute worst on the console" lists it sometimes finds itself on; it's hardly on the same plane as ugly, unplayable tripe like Karate. (And yes, I know someone will shout "but it IS unplayable!" I don't think so, though there's definitely a learning curve - and a little spamming of moves and enemy AI - involved in progressing. There have been discussions dedicated to all that before however, so I'll refrain from a full dissertation on the subject. I will say though that had they simply lowered the difficulty and not attempted to map so many moves to a single button & joystick combo, I think current popular viewpoints on the game would be a LOT different nowadays.)

 

In the interest of full-disclosure, I'm a Double Dragon fanatic. I tend to snap up as many entries in the franchise as I can, so I can be a bit softer on the 2600 version. Like Rampage, it's got the whole demake, "they actually MADE this?!" thing going for it - only taken to the nth degree. Nobody should have expected a hot beat-'em-up that was tearing up the arcades and other home consoles to make any sort of appearance on the severely under powered 2600 - but it did and that alone makes the game utterly fascinating. Your mileage may vary, but frankly, I think that fascination transcends the actual gameplay of the cart itself. Love it or hate it, Double Dragon on the 2600 is undeniably a curio!

 

And finally, there's Ghostbusters II. I was a Ghostbusters kid, so anything from that era is going to strike a chord with me. A game (one from the incredibly late date of 1992, no less!) that was never released in the U.S., based on one of the cinematic cornerstones of my youth? Want! NEED! It may be sorta ugly and somewhat lacking in the gameplay department (at least as far as the first stage goes; stage two, if you can get to it, looks and, IIRC, plays quite a bit better), but I didn't and don't care; I *love* the very fact that there's a Ghostbusters II on the 2600. I'm not sure what the value of it is nowadays, but it doesn't matter; I consider my boxed copy one of the hallmarks of my 2600 collection.

(While we're at it, with it hailing from 1985, I'm not sure if you can consider Activision's first Ghostbusters on the 2600 in the same category as these other late games - though '85 certainly was a particularly 'lost' year in the 2600's lifespan - but boy am I sucker for it. I love that original Activision game on pretty much any platform, but the fact that, like so many other games in this discussion, they managed to fit such an 'involved' title into a 2600 cart, well, I think it's impressive. I don't even mind - too much - that it requires you to make in-game use of switches on the console itself, which is usually an "aw c'mon!" thing with me.)

 

So anyway, just a few thoughts of mine; YMMV, of course. Fun topic, at any rate!

 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, davidcalgary29 said:

Solaris is an outright classic,

You are right most people do seem to like Solaris. I think its more so the arcade ports people don't like. Maybe because they already existed on more advanced consoles?

 

4 hours ago, King Atari said:

In the interest of full-disclosure, I'm a Double Dragon fanatic. I tend to snap up as many entries in the franchise as I can, so I can be a bit softer on the 2600 version.

I love double dragon too. While it is flawed, it is very playable once you figure out how to pummel your opponent with elbows. I have beaten it multiple times and very easily make it to mission 3 even when I am having a bad game. 

 

In 87/88 I think there may have actually been more NES style games on the 2600 than the 7800 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, envytomdead2 said:

You are right most people do seem to like Solaris. I think its more so the arcade ports people don't like. Maybe because they already existed on more advanced consoles?

 

I love double dragon too. While it is flawed, it is very playable once you figure out how to pummel your opponent with elbows. I have beaten it multiple times and very easily make it to mission 3 even when I am having a bad game. 

 

In 87/88 I think there may have actually been more NES style games on the 2600 than the 7800 

But what's your basis for the belief that there is or was widespread criticism of the 2600's late '80s library? It was a 10 year-old platform by that point, and most critics judged it on that basis: I don't recall gaming magazines at the time saying more than, “...and there's a new 2600 release!"...if anything was said at all. And yes, there are some silly YouTubers out there are producing some questionable critiques, but they're of little consequence. 

 

The 2600 has some terrible commercial releases, but most of those were crash-era titles. With a few exceptions, most 2600 titles from the late '80s were actually pretty good. I'm going to add Crossbow to the list of superior late '80s 2600 arcade ports. It gets alot of flack because Atari turned this into a point-and-click shooter, but as 7800 Alien Brigade shows on the Evercade, it doesn't mean you still can't have fun just because you can't use a lightgun. And Activision did a pretty good job with Commando. It’s not very pretty, but gameplay is decent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm indifferent to them, I find it really cool that a tarp was supporting the 2600 10 years after it came out, and some of the games are great (Jr. Pac-Man is one game that comes to mind), but there are others that feel like they were only made for a quick buck (Double Dragon). Half of the devs seemed like they cared, and tried to make the best games they could for the 2600, but others felt like they were only doing it so they could add one extra port to the pile or they were making 2600 games due to a contract.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, davidcalgary29 said:

But what's your basis for the belief that there is or was widespread criticism of the 2600's late '80s library? 

Reviews online. the videogame critic is one example. He trashes pretty much every game on my list. There are other reviewers I have read/watched online but I'd have look for them again. Here is one for Kung Fu Master:

http://www.atarihq.com/reviews/2600/kung_fu_master.html

 

A sort of meh review of commando 

https://www.freezenet.ca/review-commando-atari-2600/

 

Edited by envytomdead2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, envytomdead2 said:

 

A sort of meh review of commando 

https://www.freezenet.ca/review-commando-atari-2600/

 

I read it...and then read the review for the 7800 port, which is a pretty great port: "For a game of its time, it was definitely a game that had some thought behind it. Unfortunately, games like Super Mario Bros 3 and Snow Brothers were around at the same time. So, while there was some entertainment value to be had here, there were more developed games to be had at the time." I see. In other words, we're not going to really evaluate the 7800 port of Commando, but complain that it sucks because it's not actually a port of Super Mario Bros 3 and Snow Brothers. Got it. What a stupid review!

 

Most of those reviewers continue to conflate "Atari Corp." with "Atari consoles", and are only interested in particpating in popular myths (ie. the company was horrible, so the games must have sucked) rather than properly evaluating its games. I don't like the VGC either, as scores are arbitrary and seemingly mandated by personal tastes and/or grudges. I see now why you think these games were received poorly, but here I think it's the case that it's the critics -- and not the games -- that are actually bad.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, davidcalgary29 said:

I read it...and then read the review for the 7800 port, which is a pretty great port: "For a game of its time, it was definitely a game that had some thought behind it. Unfortunately, games like Super Mario Bros 3 and Snow Brothers were around at the same time. So, while there was some entertainment value to be had here, there were more developed games to be had at the time." I see. In other words, we're not going to really evaluate the 7800 port of Commando, but complain that it sucks because it's not actually a port of Super Mario Bros 3 and Snow Brothers. Got it. What a stupid review!

Both the 2600 and 7800 Commando reviews there are ridiculous. The 2600 one makes similar points (even going so far as to inexplicably compare the game to Super Mario Bros. 2 and Zelda II), with this being my 'favorite' bit:

"Graphically speaking, this game is far from the ugliest game I’ve ever played on this system. There are plenty of games with worse graphics on this system. While the characters and scenery in this game are pretty easy to make out, this game was also released when the NES system is dominating the gaming scene. Games like Contra and Mega Man easily tops the graphics that are offered up in this game. So, while the graphics are decent for the system in question, it falls well short of expectations for its time."

So Commando 2600 looks good but actually doesn't because it's not Contra or Mega Man on the NES? That makes absolutely no sense. No kidding games on a console considerably more powerful look better. The only way that becomes an even remotely valid comparison is if he's talking about the NES port of Commando. (Or, I guess, if 2600 Commando had been specifically marketed as a killer of those games - which I highly doubt.)

Edited by King Atari
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with what most people here have said - most of these late games are awesome. In particular, Solaris stands out to me because it is one of the reasons I got back into the 2600. I have a large gap in my 2600 history; I got one in the early 80's as a kid with a handful of games. I think the newest, most advanced game I had back then was Dig Dug. Around 1985 I got a Commodore 64 and the 2600 ended up in a box in the attic, where it stayed over the next 25 years.

 

I had pretty much forgotten all about the system when in 2010 or so I came across a 2600 video on Youtube and watched it, gripped by sudden nostalgia. It was one of those videos that showcased about thirty 2600 games in a few minutes. Among them were some games I knew, some I didn't, and Solaris. When Solaris came up, I thought the guy who posted the video got his systems mixed up and had posted a 7800 or Colecovision game by accident. The graphics, the scaling, the complexity - to me it just didn't seem possible that this could be achieved on my dusty old 2600 moldering in the attic. So of course I had to get the game and see for myself, and it blew me away. Then I discovered AtariAge, the late 80's 2600 library, modern homebrews, etc. and here I am today, a 2600 gamer and collector. 

 

So yes, many of those games rock.     

Edited by WolfAmongWolves
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, King Atari said:

So Commando 2600 looks good but actually doesn't because it's not Contra or Mega Man on the NES? That makes absolutely no sense. No kidding games on a console considerably more powerful look better. The only way that becomes an even remotely valid comparison is if he's talking about the NES port of Commando. (Or, I guess, if 2600 Commando had been specifically marketed as a killer of those games - which I highly doubt.)

There's nothing wrong with a "let's compare games on different platforms!" approach as long as it doesn't turn into a fanboi flamewar (which it is in that review) and covers the basics of a game review: is it a good port (if it is one), and should I spend money on it? You can tell these people just play everything on emulators, because the reviewer didn't pick up my one beef for the 7800 port: controller issues when played with the ProLines. You'd think someone reading a 7800 review would want to know that. 

1 hour ago, WolfAmongWolves said:

I agree with what most people here have said - most of these late games are awesome. In particular, Solaris stands out to me because it is one of the reasons I got back into the 2600. I have a large gap in my 2600 history; I got one in the early 80's as a kid with a handful of games. I think the newest, most advanced game I had back then was Dig Dug. Around 1985 I got a Commodore 64 and the 2600 ended up in a box in the attic, where it stayed over the next 25 years.

 

I had pretty much forgotten all about the system when in 2010 or so I came across a 2600 video on Youtube and watched it, gripped by sudden nostalgia. It was one of those videos that showcased about thirty 2600 games in a few minutes. Among them were some games I knew, some I didn't, and Solaris. When Solaris came up, I thought the guy who posted the video got his systems mixed up and had posted a 7800 or Colecovision game by accident. The graphics, the scaling, the complexity - to me it just didn't seem possible that this could be achieved on my dusty old 2600 moldering in the attic. So of course I had to get the game and see for myself, and it blew me away. Then I discovered AtariAge, the late 80's 2600 library, modern homebrews, etc. and here I am today, a 2600 gamer and collector. 

 

So yes, many of those games rock.     

I discovered Solaris in a box of commons someone sent me about fifteen years ago. I was test-checking all the carts (unconvinced that I should play any of them, as I thought that the 2600 was too rudimentary for me), and...was blown away when I put this in. Solaris was the game that convinced me that the 2600 had something to offer (I was, and still am, an A8 snob). And the homebrews have convinced me to keep playing it. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it only makes sense that many of the last games developed or released for a console will be among the best of its entire library. I think the Atari versions of games like Rampage, Ikari Warriors, Commando, Kung Fu Master, Xenophobe, etc. get put down not because they're intrinsically poor, but because the stark contrast between them and the NES or Sega versions highlight how comically obsolescent and redundant the 2600 had become by then. But they're great games!

 

Radar Lock, BMX Airmaster, Xenophobe, Ikari Warriors, River Raid II, and Secret Quest are some of my favorites that don't seem to get talked about a lot. And of course Kung-Fu Master, Jr. Pac-Man, Winter/Summer/California Games, Solaris, Pete Rose Baseball, Midnight Magic, Super Football, and Commando are almost universally well-regarded for good reason.

 

I don't understand why Rampage gets dumped on so much, though. Okay, so the characters look a bit deformed and the physics are very "2600," but it's got a title screen; a player select screen; all three characters from the arcade; inter-level datelines; distinguishable levels with features like bridges, rivers, waterfronts, boats, etc.; actual progression; and simultaneous 2-player. What else do you want? ? I've said before that the problem with this game is the same problem that every version of Rampage has: it gets tedious. Until then, it's a great game.

 

Although they were released during or just before the Crash, I consider Defender II and Gravitar to be "late releases" since I was introduced to them in their later Red Label guises (chances are this is how most people knew Gravitar anyway, given that it was originally an Atari Club title). And honestly, despite being a few years older, they're good enough that they're not out of place in the 2600's late '80s lineup.

 

My only beef with the latter-day 2600 exclusives (if it can even be called a "beef"), like Radar Lock, Solaris, Realsports Boxing, Jr. Pac-Man, or Secret Quest, is that IMO they should have been 7800 titles instead. Or at least had 7800 versions. That was supposed to be Atari Corp.'s flagship console and supporting the 2600 with this kind of software only undermined it. OTOH the fact the 2600 had so many excellent titles come out for it well after it should have been retired only adds to the mystique of the console!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BassGuitari said:

Well, it only makes sense that many of the last games developed or released for a console will be among the best of its entire library. I think the Atari versions of games like Rampage, Ikari Warriors, Commando, Kung Fu Master, Xenophobe, etc. get put down not because they're intrinsically poor, but because the stark contrast between them and the NES or Sega versions highlight how comically obsolescent and redundant the 2600 had become by then. But they're great games!

 

 

The thing is that I didn't really see a lot of this in the gaming press in the late '80s, because most people had to buy games to play them, and game critics, now matter how much they hated Atari, typically didn't say "this game sucks. Forget about the thousands you've invested in your 2600; dump your console and go buy a NES!".  I do, however, see this constantly now, when critics can hide behind their nice, flashy emulators and never have to pay a penny for a game, or pick up an actual joystick. or use actual hardware to play it. I think emulators encourage people to think of games as disposable, five-minute portions of entertainment that they can judge superficially without getting into a deep dive before they move on to the next bright, shiny object. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...