Would Atari had been better off if Bushnell hadn´t sold it?

[agradeneu]

6 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

That's mostly polygons not pseudo 3D games. Which are still sprites.

 

The Genesis was made to handle ports of earlier scaler games. I'm sure we would have had more if the Genesis was more popular in japan.

 

Especially with third parties 

That is why it has no hardware support for scaling?

The Lynx was the first console with such capabilities, it was designed for superscaler like games. (And let's not forget about SNES Mode 7, different technique, but great).

So, the Genesis is no contest for the Lynx in that regard.

 

BTW, the most popular Arcade 3D games were ported to the Genesis: Afterburner, Roadblasters, Hard Drivin'....I even can remember a Flight Simulation, F15 Eagle or so.

But none of these games set the world on fire. 

But... Sonic actually did!

Edited September 5, 2021 by agradeneu

[agradeneu]

11 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

That's not what's happening, it's swapping out different sprites to make the illusionsl the cars are actually changing/getting closer in real time. Its not actually scaling.

 

It's also very simple to keep the speed.

 

Genesis does it the same way! 

 

Edited September 5, 2021 by agradeneu

[Leeroy ST]

9 minutes ago, agradeneu said:

That is why it has no hardware support for scaling?

 

I never said it did, I said it was made to handle limited ports of those earlier scaler games.

 

6 minutes ago, agradeneu said:

Genesis does it the same way! 

A couple games actually scale the sprites. But yes, the Genesis does the NES/SNES trick for others, faster.

 

9 minutes ago, agradeneu said:

BTW, the most popular Arcade 3D games were ported to the Genesis: Afterburner, Roadblasters, Hard Drivin'....I even can remember a Flight Simulation, F15 Eagle or so.

But none of these games set the world on fire. 

But... Sonic actually did!

 

Uh, yeah I said that here:

 

48 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

If Genesis was more popular in japan and those scaler ports sold better maybe more developers would have done those.

 

Genesis was always fighting an uphill battle in US until Sonic. Regardless of game type, scaler, scroller, shmup, etc. That wasn't a scaler exclusive thing.

[agradeneu]

24 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

I never said it did, I said it was made to handle limited ports of those earlier scaler games.

 

A couple games actually scale the sprites. But yes, the Genesis does the NES/SNES trick for others, faster.

 

 

Uh, yeah I said that here:

 

 

Genesis was always fighting an uphill battle in US until Sonic. Regardless of game type, scaler, scroller, shmup, etc. That wasn't a scaler exclusive thing.

I am pretty sure 2D shmups were much more popular in Japan than anything 3D (shooter). Now add in JRPGs and platformers and you know what was popular in Japan.

That is why these consoles were designed as they were. 

 

As far as I know the Genesis has no hw support for scaling sprites. Drawing rapidly sprites of different sizes from buffer to screen can fake it. But that is a trick you will find on the NES as well (although more limited) 

But do me a favour, look into the documentation of the VDP graphics chip and show me the feature I am missing.;-)

 

 

https://megacatstudios.com/blogs/retro-development/sega-genesis-mega-drive-vdp-graphics-guide-v1-2a-03-14-17

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 5, 2021 by agradeneu

[Leeroy ST]

45 minutes ago, agradeneu said:

I am pretty sure 2D shmups were much more popular in Japan than anything 3D (shooter). Now add in JRPGs and platformers and you know what was popular in Japan.

That is why these consoles were designed as they were. 

 

2D Shmups weren't that big in japan by that era either. Also the Genesis flopped in Japan.

 

But shmups had an easy template to build on and weren't that costly unless you were trying to be ambitious.

 

I see no shmups in the first 100 best sellers on Super Famicom, so any shmup on the system likely sold less than 100k at minimum.

 

While on original Famicom Xevious was #28 with 1.27 million sold. With Twinbee following at #31 and Star Soldier at #40, both selling over a million.

 

Reason for the many shoot em ups is easy money. Ones with bigger production typically dont sell well. That's why you dont see many more ambitious shooters in graphics and production. But a b budget effort will make money with 20,000 sales. Well maybe not so much now but back then.

 

Jrpgs on the other hand were a big deal on both SFC and the PC Engine. Platformers did a decent second but not as big as people think in Japan.

 

But Sega of Japan was likely trying to push genres they were behind in with the SMS. Which is why the Saturn which finally managed to do that, was mostly successful there. Sega's best selling console in the country. But their efforts with the Genesis faltered.

 

Sega wanted Genesis to be powerful enough to imitate arcade scalers and flight sims, but also wanted to make it easier for Japanese devs to bring those tile based game types over seen on more popular systems. Cheapest way to do that  would be to focus on tiles at system level

 

Of course it failed in japan anyway, even in US Sega sold more on western support than Japanese support. 

 

Quote

As far as I know the Genesis has no hw support for scaling sprites. 

I never made this statement, I said this last time too and you brought it up twice now. 

 

 

Edited September 5, 2021 by Leeroy ST

[Leeroy ST]

2 hours ago, leech said:

Fans of things are funny.  They will claim that the company they are a fan of invented this or that.  And when you prove them wrong, then they go to the "but they did it better and they are remembered for making it good."  I hear this all the time about Apple.

 

 

It's very common because they dont want to acknowledge the claim itself was wrong, so they add quotes like that to the topic even though it wasn't previously part of the conversation. Moving the posts 

[agradeneu]

38 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

 

 

 

Sega wanted Genesis to be powerful enough to imitate arcade scalers and flight sims, but also wanted to make it easier for Japanese devs to bring those tile based game types over seen on more popular systems. Cheapest way to do that  would be to focus on tiles at system level

 

Of course it failed in japan anyway, even in US Sega sold more on western support than Japanese support. 

 

I never made this statement, I said this last time too and you brought it up twice now. 

 

 

Well, you boast it's capabilities with "scaling sprites" while in reality, coders have to cheat to make that effect:

 

https://plutiedev.com/scaling-sprites

 

You also use the term "scaling capabilities" for the 7800, which is mostly incorrect,  while you dismiss the same trick for the NES. 

 

Anyway, enough off topic!

[Leeroy ST]

Just now, agradeneu said:

Well, you boast it's capabilities with "scaling sprites" while in reality, coders have to cheat to make that effect:

 

https://plutiedev.com/scaling-sprites

 

You also use the term "scaling capabilities" for the 7800, which is mostly incorrect,  while you dismiss the same trick for the NES. 

You're poorly grasping for straws here.

 

Capabilities doesn't mean hardware. You dont need dedicated hardware for limited scaling, and you KNOW dedicated hardware for scaling wasn't mentioned.

 

And uh no the 7800 doesn't use the same trick as the NES for several games, 7800 has clear plane and sprite scaling due to Maria, shown in games like the flight sims. There are exceptions.

 

So it's not incorrect at all, you're trying to be slick but failed.

 

The 7800 and NES have different strengths with two different goals. 

 

But anyway yes back on topic.

 

[Leeroy ST]

On 9/3/2021 at 12:04 AM, Matt_B said:

They got to keep all the staff, with even Bushnell remaining in day-to-day charge of the company, with access to bigger budgets and Warner's marketing power. It's only the events of subsequent years that caused the wheels to come off and whether they'd even have made it as far as they did without the injection of cash the sale gave them remains an open question for me.

 

An interesting question would be, could Atari compete with Fairchild without that significant Warner cash injection?

 

In the 70's into the 80's Fairchild was not some C tier company. Once Atari came out with 2600 they still would have completed. With Warner Atari they were not going to go too far in competing, but without the Warner injection they could be more competitive at lesser cost.

 

That VES/Channel F one year head start would be more significant because Atari would then have to gradually gain distribution and build their marketing without Warner. 

 

Not sure if Fairchild would win, maybe, but they would have more marketshare either way, and likely invest in a proper successor.

 

 

 

[roots.genoa]

5 hours ago, leech said:

Fans of things are funny.  They will claim that the company they are a fan of invented this or that.  And when you prove them wrong, then they go to the "but they did it better and they are remembered for making it good."  I hear this all the time about Apple.

Well, maybe because it's easier to get an idea than to make it reality?

[DavidD]

8 hours ago, Leeroy ST said:

I posted articles that showed this that you conveniently skipped. There's no bias involved with an easily searchable library of titles and counting which game types. Considering I mentioned game types multiple times it should be obvious I meant the former.

 

I didn't "skip" them, but I don't really see the relevance.  A few anecdotes about how "too many games are the same now" and giving examples of knock-offs doesn't translate to "there were fewer genres/forms of games."  If your point was that there were fewer kinds of games on the NES, I'm more puzzled -- I would readily granted a preponderance of knock-off platformers on the NES, but I must admit that I'm not really sure how you can argue that the 2600, 5200, Intellivision, or Colecovision had a larger variety of game forms than the NES did.  They might have, of course, but I do wonder how much of that comes down to subjective interpretation of game genres.  What are you basing these game type counts on?  What are some examples of game types entirely missing from the NES that were on one of its predecessors?  I'm sure there are some, but ...

 

8 hours ago, Leeroy ST said:

You're joking right? You do realize NES in many cases had to stack sprites to make large sprites right? It's a default limitation of a tile based system.

 

Nes (without help) can't have 5 Mario sized sprites move and enlarge themselves into a contra boss sized sprite, and back again moving across the screen instantly in real time. With help it can somewhat do it with limitations but it wouldn't be as fast either way.

 

Ah. Okay, I'll readily grant you that the NES can't resize character mapped items automatically/easily/etc. I read your list as a general complaint that "the NES was inferior in all ways regarding 'sprite' work", but you meant it far more specifically. The items-per-line limit (tied to flicker) is true, and "sprites" aren't resized.  I guess I was just thinking that overall animation and graphical fidelity seems higher on the NES than its predecessors (2600, 5200, Intellivision, Colecovision) and I really couldn't think of any of those systems having "sprites" that were as detailed as NES ones with size changes "on the fly."

 

I suppose the Colecovision would come the closest, of course.  However, at the risk of seeming disengenous (which is not my intent at all), are there some good examples of Colecovision games demonstrating its superiority to the NES?

[DavidD]

6 hours ago, leech said:

Fans of things are funny.  They will claim that the company they are a fan of invented this or that.  And when you prove them wrong, then they go to the "but they did it better and they are remembered for making it good."  I hear this all the time about Apple.

 

In all fairness, though, the "who did something first" point is not nearly as important as "who did something best."  It reminds of the various magician societies and clubs -- what the enthusiasts focus on (technical skill) is not nearly as important as what the majority of folks care about (showmanship).

 

It's interesting for historians and enthusiasts to know who came up with something first -- but it's more culturally meaningful to know who did it best.

 

(I do love game history trivia, though... and I get annoyed by the lack of knowledge of "firsts" too... I just have to admit that it isn't really that IMPORTANT.)

[Leeroy ST]

6 minutes ago, DavidD said:

(I do love game history trivia, though... and I get annoyed by the lack of knowledge of "firsts" too... I just have to admit that it isn't really that IMPORTANT.)

It is if it's a repeated lie in the press and creates an artificial status for a platform and people triple down on first claims.

 

Otherwise yeah.

[DavidD]

1 minute ago, Leeroy ST said:

It is if it's a repeated lie in the press and creates an artificial status for a platform and people triple down on first claims.

 

Otherwise yeah.

But...really... how likely is that?  Most "status" comes from a general appreciation for something in the first place.  False attribution of firsts can be connected to that, but... it's not as though it's stealing from the "prestige" of the lesser known predecessor.

 

What is interesting is the difference between something clearly inspired by an earlier title, versus different programmers/designers doing the same thing without knowledge of each other.

[leech]

15 minutes ago, DavidD said:

In all fairness, though, the "who did something first" point is not nearly as important as "who did something best."  It reminds of the various magician societies and clubs -- what the enthusiasts focus on (technical skill) is not nearly as important as what the majority of folks care about (showmanship).

 

It's interesting for historians and enthusiasts to know who came up with something first -- but it's more culturally meaningful to know who did it best.

 

(I do love game history trivia, though... and I get annoyed by the lack of knowledge of "firsts" too... I just have to admit that it isn't really that IMPORTANT.)

Ha, more like 'who had the wider adoption'  there have been many cases where 'the best' did not get a foothold, and the 'okay' won out.  IBM computers is a perfect example.  All the other computers were arguably better, then clones happened and the IBM Clones got cheap and upgrades got cheaper and while IBM basically lost, those clones won out.  Arguably the IBMs were built much better than the clones as well (which is why I still prefer thinkpads)

 

Ah, to think there had been a glimmer of IBM using the Atari 800 for their computer line...

[DavidD]

Just now, leech said:

Ah, to think there had been a glimmer of IBM using the Atari 800 for their computer line...

There are few companies I associate as much with "being their own worst enemy" as Atari.

 

(Not that the IBM/Atari thing was an example of that, but it sounds like it was probably an example of that.  I know almost nothing about it, but the wacky adventures of Warner and Tramiel seem to always end the same way, so...)

[leech]

3 minutes ago, DavidD said:

There are few companies I associate as much with "being their own worst enemy" as Atari.

 

(Not that the IBM/Atari thing was an example of that, but it sounds like it was probably an example of that.  I know almost nothing about it, but the wacky adventures of Warner and Tramiel seem to always end the same way, so...)

Ha, story I read was that the IBM suits showed up, and a bunch of stoners were walking around the Atari campus, and they bailed on the idea.  Or at least that was how I interpret 'company cultures did not match.'

[DavidD]

1 minute ago, leech said:

Ha, story I read was that the IBM suits showed up, and a bunch of stoners were walking around the Atari campus, and they bailed on the idea.  Or at least that was how I interpret 'company cultures did not match.'

See, the only reason I might change my vote on "would Atari be better off" is that Bushnell could have kept running the company that way for years, and that probably lead to all sorts of problems.

 

Now, what if Bushnell had hired Wozniak as a designer...

[leech]

3 minutes ago, DavidD said:

See, the only reason I might change my vote on "would Atari be better off" is that Bushnell could have kept running the company that way for years, and that probably lead to all sorts of problems.

 

Now, what if Bushnell had hired Wozniak as a designer...

Wozniak worked at Atari before.  I want to say he worked there before he and Jobs created the Apple in Woz's garage.  But I know both worked at Atari in the Bushnell days.

[Leeroy ST]

54 minutes ago, DavidD said:

.  What are you basing these game type counts on?  

These aren't 100% accurate but just using quick lists.

 

NES: 1380 games

400 are scrolling platformers

255 are shooters (most scrolling)

165 are sports

127 rpgs (chunk of them actually action adventure titles)

46 racers

35 are scrolling beat em ups 

 

 

CV 145 games:

12 platformers varying type 

40 shooters varying type

10 action adventure games

3 rpgs

10 racing games

11 sports

14 educational

30 general arcade games of different styles

 

2600 580 games:

165 shooters

50 platformers of varying types (static, multi-screen, scrolling)

50 sports

~50 misc arcade games of varying types

40 puzzle games

30 racing games

20 Action Adventure games

20 educational

15 vehicle sims

 

As you can see the NES has more games overall but the ratio is less balanced. If we go with what was promoted and what sold it's even more lopsided.

 

1 hour ago, DavidD said:

.Ah. Okay, I'll readily grant you that the NES can't resize character mapped items automatically/easily/etc. I read your list as a general complaint that "the NES was inferior in all ways regarding 'sprite' work", but you meant it far more specifically. The items-per-line limit (tied to flicker) is true, and "sprites" aren't resized.

No the NES had advantages like native multi color sprites, and such. But it had some disadvantages too.

 

Of course that's a base NES, some problems are lessened with the chips, but not entirely removed.

 

One way I look at it, the 7800 is more of an evolution of the CV than the 5200 honestly. I would say NES is an evolution of the 5200.

 

In regards to what strengths and weaknesses both consoles have compared to each other.

 

 

[Leeroy ST]

1 hour ago, DavidD said:

There are few companies I associate as much with "being their own worst enemy" as Atari.

 

(Not that the IBM/Atari thing was an example of that, but it sounds like it was probably an example of that.  I know almost nothing about it, but the wacky adventures of Warner and Tramiel seem to always end the same way, so...)

Sega.

 

Also interesting how Atari was later able to get with IBM for the Jaguar, but I guess that was a "different" Atari. So IBM bit.

[roots.genoa]

9 hours ago, leech said:

Wozniak worked at Atari before.  I want to say he worked there before he and Jobs created the Apple in Woz's garage.  But I know both worked at Atari in the Bushnell days.

Absolutely not. Steve Jobs was hired because people at Atari thought he made Wozniak's Pong clone. The problem is, Jobs had no competence in electronics, so he basically asked Woz to do part of his work in secret, but Wozniak was never an Atari employee. Also Wozniak's Breakout design was never used (it cost too much), even though it might have won the internal competition. Finally, Woz made the Apple I & II without Jobs knowing about them until they were completed.

 

I know because I had to write a short bio of Woz and he correct several of my mistakes.

[agradeneu]

11 hours ago, Leeroy ST said:

These aren't 100% accurate but just using quick lists.

 

NES: 1380 games

400 are scrolling platformers

255 are shooters (most scrolling)

165 are sports

127 rpgs (chunk of them actually action adventure titles)

46 racers

35 are scrolling beat em ups 

 

 

CV 145 games:

12 platformers varying type 

40 shooters varying type

10 action adventure games

3 rpgs

10 racing games

11 sports

14 educational

30 general arcade games of different styles

 

2600 580 games:

165 shooters

50 platformers of varying types (static, multi-screen, scrolling)

50 sports

~50 misc arcade games of varying types

40 puzzle games

30 racing games

20 Action Adventure games

20 educational

15 vehicle sims

 

As you can see the NES has more games overall but the ratio is less balanced. If we go with what was promoted and what sold it's even more lopsided.

 

No the NES had advantages like native multi color sprites, and such. But it had some disadvantages too.

 

Of course that's a base NES, some problems are lessened with the chips, but not entirely removed.

 

One way I look at it, the 7800 is more of an evolution of the CV than the 5200 honestly. I would say NES is an evolution of the 5200.

 

In regards to what strengths and weaknesses both consoles have compared to each other.

 

 

 

Well , you have forgotten about the dreadful adult games on 2600. (Really a lowpoint of videogame history)

But: 

No puzzlers or point and click adventures on NES? Interesting, I am sure I played some of those when I was a kid.

No Arcade games too? Why is vehicle sims an extra category on 2600? No vehicles on NES?

If I remember correctly, I played a good port of Silent Service 2.

What about strategy games like North&South, Lemmings? 

 

Well, whatever you mean with "balance" Leeroy, I am sure that a kiddo understood that a selection of 120 Adventure games/RPGs was preferable to just 20.

And possibly the quality of individual games is more meaningful than abstract and argueably biased statistics. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[high voltage]

Atari VCS: Quality before Quantity

[Leeroy ST]

59 minutes ago, agradeneu said:

 

Well , you have forgotten about the dreadful adult games on 2600. (Really a lowpoint of videogame history)

But: 

No puzzlers or point and click adventures on NES? Interesting, I

You're grasping, those are the vast majority of the libraries listed for all 3. Notice how you only went for the small group genres missing on the NES and not the other two. How curious I wonder why you did that. Hmmm.

 

Lack Variety was the point and this showcases it. The ratio is lopsided. Especially if we talk about what was actually pushed and known to most consumers.