Which post-2600 Atari console do you like best?

[zzip]

4 minutes ago, ZuluGula said:

Everytime someones call XEGS a game console, I feel like they do a disservice to it. In reality it's a computer, same like 400/800, XL and XE series. This means that the software library is much bigger than any console, and it goes beyond games. Also, the amount of available peripherals is much bigger than any console of that time. The storage is not limited to cartridges only, but it also includes tape and floppy drives. 

But I have to wonder how many people bought XEGS and used it as a console and never expanded it with a disk drive?   A bunch of formerly disk-based games got rereleased on cart to support the XEGS console concept.

[+ZuluGula]

It's possible that some people would buy it only to play cartridge games. But they would miss all that huge software library or possibility to get pirated software. I wonder how XEGS was advertised on TV and i magazines.

[Leeroy ST]

4 hours ago, zzip said:

But I have to wonder how many people bought XEGS and used it as a console and never expanded it with a disk drive?   A bunch of formerly disk-based games got rereleased on cart to support the XEGS console concept.

Yeah but this is also true for the later 8bit models, they got some conversions to cart to. It wasn't just the XEGS.

 

 

[zzip]

On 9/24/2021 at 6:30 PM, Leeroy ST said:

Yeah but this is also true for the later 8bit models, they got some conversions to cart to. It wasn't just the XEGS.

 

 

I guess it depends when you got your 8-bit.   Most cartridge software disappeared from the market by 85, and in that period if you wanted to play current games, you needed a disk drive.    But after 87 Atari started releasing a bunch of games on  larger carts, so you could get away without a disk at that point.

[pacman000]

On 9/24/2021 at 1:48 PM, ZuluGula said:

It's possible that some people would buy it only to play cartridge games. But they would miss all that huge software library or possibility to get pirated software. I wonder how XEGS was advertised on TV and i magazines.

In these 1987 ads it was advertised as a game system which could also play computer games:

 

 

 

In this 1988 ad it was advertised as a game system and a computer: 

 

 

This 1988 ad calls it a game system which can play computer games:

 

 

They were definitely trying to position it against the NES, like a game system, but they were also trying to spin the added computer functionality as an advantage. Not a bad idea, &, tho they couldn't stop Nintendo, they did sell enough for it to last a couple of years.

[Leeroy ST]

2 hours ago, pacman000 said:

They were definitely trying to position it against the NES, like a game system, but they were also trying to spin the added computer functionality as an advantage. Not a bad idea, &, tho they couldn't stop Nintendo, they did sell enough for it to last a couple of years.

 

It got the job done. For Atari's goals anyway of extending the 8-bit line and selling well for the time they were making them, but it was never a serious competitor to the NES despite the ads.

 

I'd liked to see some devs make more XEGS originals but truth be told in mags and press Atari was lying (constantly)about the XEGS power, it was WEAKER than a 7800.

 

Yet Atari kept pushing it as the top of the line game system and the press ran with it, and they kept trying to justify the price in ways that didn't make sense when simply saying it could turn into a computer was really enough on its own. It was even weaker than SMS.

 

[zzip]

14 hours ago, Leeroy ST said:

I'd liked to see some devs make more XEGS originals but truth be told in mags and press Atari was lying (constantly)about the XEGS power, it was WEAKER than a 7800.

7800 was only more powerful when it came to sprites.   CPU was the same.   The XEGS had way more RAM:  64KB vs 4KB in the 7800.   Sound was much better than the 7800.

[Leeroy ST]

16 minutes ago, zzip said:

7800 was only more powerful when it came to sprites.   CPU was the same.   The XEGS had way more RAM:  64KB vs 4KB in the 7800.   Sound was much better than the 7800.

The 7800 was better in sprites, Parallax, Pseudo 3D and 3D, let's not downplay the power difference.

 

Look at what was needed for Crownland on A8 and it still had numerous issues. Also, Sound has nothing to do with power.

 

More RAM isn't going to fix or brute force around the XE limitations 

[zzip]

43 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

Look at what was needed for Crownland on A8 and it still had numerous issues.  Also, Sound has nothing to do with power.

It affects the user experience.   It's a real let-down to hear 2600-quality sound coming from a system with advanced graphics like that.  It really ought to have had a Pokey or better.  The idea to just "put it in the cart" didn't work out since few carts actually did.

 

Crownland was an attempt to do an NES-style game.   But XE is not an NES.   The results it delivers are quite impressive, but it clearly can't do all the effects as effortlessly as the NES does.    The thing about the 8-bit era was each system had its unique set of strengths and weaknesses, and when a game was designed to play to the strength of one it usually had to make sacrifices being ported to other platforms.   Games written for the Atari 8-bit would usually have inferior ports on Apple II, C64 or NES,  but a game written on Apple II or  C64 was often worse on Atari, etc. 

 

48 minutes ago, Leeroy ST said:

More RAM isn't going to fix or brute force around the XE limitations 

It allows more complex games.   And yes you can brute force some things with more RAM to work with.  

 

[pacman000]

3 hours ago, zzip said:

It allows more complex games.   And yes you can brute force some things with more RAM to work with.  

From the ads, that's what Atari Corp was going for; they were promoting the XEGS as a game system which could play more complex games than the NES or 7800.

 

Don't know how true that is with all the mapping chips Nintendo could put in their carts, but an ad is an ad; it's supposed to emphasize theoretical strengths, so I'll forgive it of it exaggerates.

Edited September 28, 2021 by pacman000

[zzip]

19 minutes ago, pacman000 said:

From the ads, that's what Atari Corp was going for; they were promoting the XEGS as a game system which could play more complex games than the NES or 7800.

 

Don't know how true that is with all the mapping chips Nintendo could put in their carts, but an ad is an ad; it's supposed to emphasize theoretical strengths, so I'll forgive it of it exaggerates.

On the surface I'd say it's true if you compare the base hardware.   There were whole genres of games that we were playing on our 8-bit home computers that barely existed on consoles at the time, like RPGs, tactical wargames, Interactive fiction..

 

But yeah they kept expanding the NES capabilities through carts so that it could play more complex stuff over time.   And I think they came up with a way to save your progress to cart too?   Eventually consoles got those types of games and the gap between what a computer could do and what a console could do shrank.

[Leeroy ST]

On 9/28/2021 at 11:00 AM, zzip said:

 

It allows more complex games.   And yes you can brute force some things with more RAM to work with.  

 

But this didn't happen with the XEGS so...

 

On 9/28/2021 at 11:00 AM, zzip said:

Crownland was an attempt to do an NES-style game.   But XE is not an NES.   The results it delivers are quite impressive, but it clearly can't do all the effects as effortlessly as the NES does.    

Which was the point, the 7800 could do as similar game much better than the A8 can without the spec boosts.

 

The only point is the XEGS was in no way better than the 7800 in visuals and graphic features in execution.

 

On 9/28/2021 at 2:43 PM, zzip said:

But yeah they kept expanding the NES capabilities through carts so that it could play more complex stuff over time.   And I think they came up with a way to save your progress to cart too?   

Some systems had internal storage which imo is more impressive than putting a save solution in a cart but eh.

 

On 9/28/2021 at 2:14 PM, pacman000 said:

From the ads, that's what Atari Corp was going for; they were promoting the XEGS as a game system which could play more complex games than the NES or 7800.

They has positioned to the press from the start the XEGS was the strongest console justifying the price and the press DID roll with it true or not, and did work to an extent.

 

[+Muddyfunster]

On 9/28/2021 at 2:51 PM, Leeroy ST said:

The 7800 was better in sprites, Parallax, Pseudo 3D and 3D, let's not downplay the power difference.

To suggest the 7800 is better at 3D than the A8 (XEGS etc) range is uninformed at best.

[Leeroy ST]

On 9/29/2021 at 5:41 PM, Muddyfunster said:

To suggest the 7800 is better at 3D than the A8 (XEGS etc) range is uninformed at best.

Tell me which XEGS software shows it does 3D better?  Presumably I assume you are talking polygons.

Edited October 1, 2021 by Leeroy ST

[+ZuluGula]

Rescue on Fractalus!

Stunt Car Racer

[Leeroy ST]

2 hours ago, ZuluGula said:

Rescue on Fractalus!

Stunt Car Racer

Looking for something more technically impressive than F18 Hornet on the 7800.

[agradeneu]

Battlezone

[agradeneu]

On 9/29/2021 at 11:41 PM, Muddyfunster said:

To suggest the 7800 is better at 3D than the A8 (XEGS etc) range is uninformed at best.

Thanks for the clearup! ?

[Leeroy ST]

On 10/2/2021 at 8:00 AM, agradeneu said:

Battlezone

A non polygon game more technically demanding than a polygon game with pse-scaling sprites?

 

On 10/2/2021 at 8:04 AM, agradeneu said:

Thanks for the clearup! ?

You both use emojis but have not listed anything to show otherwise. Classic youtuber comment tier behavior when you have no argument.

Edited October 3, 2021 by Leeroy ST

[NoBloodyXLOrE]

On 9/9/2021 at 7:14 PM, Leeroy ST said:

The issue is the intimidation factor.

 

Consumers didn't realize the relative ease of use, and generally looked at computers similar to each other. 

 

The C64 was the outlier I dont think the A400 could ever be. And even in your scenario it would still release.

 

I think the bigger issue with the 5200 is that they should have made the software interchangable. So you could just plop a A4/8 cart into the slot and it plays. Giving it an instant library, instead of having the 5200 play proprietary carts.

 

It wouldn't fix the controllers, but it would solve the complaints of slow software releases.

I suppose with the 5200 keypad joysticks, most 400/800 games that need the keyboard actually would work, but making it more like an XEGS in 1982 wouldn't have hurt, but to be honest, most of the best 400/800 games made it to the 5200 anyway (it's generally the other way around that I'm jealous of, with games like Berserk, Jr. Pac Man, and an improved Centipede port), with Donkey Kong being one of the few exceptions sticking around in my mind.

[NoBloodyXLOrE]

On 9/24/2021 at 2:48 PM, ZuluGula said:

It's possible that some people would buy it only to play cartridge games. But they would miss all that huge software library or possibility to get pirated software. I wonder how XEGS was advertised on TV and i magazines.

I have to disagree with your comment. TV advertisements for the XEGS do tout its ability to play both cartridge and disk-based games, but all of the best Atari 8-bit games are on cartridge anyway. And while the XEGS was functional as a computer, by 1987, it was no more technically impressive than the other low-end computer option, the C64, with even less productivity software, so other than a handful of productivity applications, some telecommunications software, and BASIC, it just couldn't stack up, especially against "real" computers like the Amiga, PC, and Atari ST.

[agradeneu]

1 hour ago, Leeroy ST said:

A non polygon game more technically demanding than a polygon game with pse-scaling sprites?

 

You both use emojis but have not listed anything to show otherwise. Classic youtuber comment tier behavior when you have no argument.

What makes you so sure that F18 Hornet was a polygon 3D engine? Do you have written one? For any system? And why was a polygon engine using prescaling sprites? A polygon is a sprite? Interesting! 

 

Anyway, to me it looks like they did some neat tricks with line shifting pixels to create some sort of tilt effect when you bank left and right. There is no rotation in a 360 degree fashion as well as no objects rotating. Given that 3D takes a LOT of math calculations, the GPU is not really any help for that and the CPU of the 7800 is a bit too slow.  With those old machines, any 3D calculation had to be done with the CPU in software....

 

Anyway, Battlezone is a true 3D game as there is 360 degree rotation, the polygons are not filled, but they are polygons nontheless.

Edited October 3, 2021 by agradeneu

[+Muddyfunster]

On 9/28/2021 at 2:51 PM, Leeroy ST said:

The 7800 was better in sprites, Parallax, Pseudo 3D and 3D, let's not downplay the power difference.

Still waiting for some evidence that the 7800 was better on 3D than the A8 range. Asking for something more impressive than the 7800 version of F18 isn't evidence.

 

By your argument then, the 7800 could do Stunt Car Racer better than the A8 as it's better at 3D, right?

 

Guess you have a demo of that on the 7800 then or maybe something else 3d like Elite on the 7800? No?

 

Please show some evidence on that or accept that your statement was incorrect.

 

1 hour ago, Leeroy ST said:

You both use emojis but have not listed anything to show otherwise. Classic youtuber comment tier behavior when you have no argument.

Are you going to go straight to name calling again without even the pretence of debate?, throwing veiled insults? Do I need to call a grown-up to monitor your interactions here ?

 

You see, I don't need to have an argument, I said your original comment (that the 7800 is more powerful than the A8 at 3d) was uniformed and you've posted nothing to change that opinion or prove otherwise.

 

 

 

Edited October 3, 2021 by Muddyfunster

[Leeroy ST]

1 hour ago, Muddyfunster said:

Still waiting for some evidence that the 7800 was better on 3D than the A8 range. Asking for something more impressive than the 7800 version of F18 isn't evidence.

You are continuing to not name any titles more technically impressive/demanding on XEGS than F18 on 7800. I did bring up in execution.

 

On paper theoreticals are fine but that's just that, on paper. F18 is evidence the 7800 could produce a relatively demanding 3D game than a XEGS specced machine. If you make the claim that the XEGS specced machine is better, or in your case obviously better, than you should be able to find a company who released a game showing this. You wouldn't make this poor argument with the Jaguar, why is the XEGS different?

 

1 hour ago, Muddyfunster said:

By your argument then, the 7800 could do Stunt Car Racer better than the A8 as it's better at 3D, right?

This is not addressing the point, instead you're trying to move the post. While possible, I never made this argument I said there wasn't any polygonal game (yet seen) that is as demanding on XEGS or more as you imply, than F18 on the 7800. Mentioning Stunt Car racer actually works against you because it's not a more hardware demanding title. The possibility that SCR may or may not work as well on a 7800 because of features of the hardware has nothing to do with actual power, otherwise games superior on 3DO than PSX due to hardware features would mean 3DO is stronger than PSX. It's not, instead with an original game of the same genre/type the PSX would prove much more powerful.

 

Issue is I see no commercial release proving better 3D on XEGS or before than F18 on the 7800.

 

This is what happens when YOU the accuser are uninformed and think you're smarter than you actually are. Resulting in dishonest tactics and trying to spin the argument.

 

You can easily resolve this by just acknowledging and fulfilling the request. Just post the game and it's done that's more demanding.

 

1 hour ago, agradeneu said:

And why was a polygon engine using prescaling sprites? 

This was not only not said, but you attempted to cut out the context by removing the word "with" to create this intentionally fake argument.

 

1 hour ago, agradeneu said:

What makes you so sure that F18 Hornet was a polygon 3D engine? 

Various objects and all the buildings are polygons, you can view them at multiple angles, they are all filled, close up there's limited texturing, and one of the vehicles is also made up polygons though more flat and pixelated.

 

In addition there's scaling sprites with the polygons, it's an ambitious and technically impressive game, if the XEGS spec or lower Atari computers were more capable of polygon 3D titles, let alone having that combined with another graphical implementation that requires relatively powerful hardware, then where is the game that shows it?

 

Remember F18 was thrown together by a small team way after it was clear 7800 would have a limited buying base. The 8-bit line until death of Xegs is 79-90/91 surely you can just post this powerful game that just ends the argument showing more demanding graphics, if it exists. And Battlezone isn't that game.

 

 

 

 

[Leeroy ST]

2 hours ago, NoBloodyXLOrE said:

I have to disagree with your comment. TV advertisements for the XEGS do tout its ability to play both cartridge and disk-based games, but all of the best Atari 8-bit games are on cartridge anyway. And while the XEGS was functional as a computer, by 1987, it was no more technically impressive than the other low-end computer option, the C64, with even less productivity software, so other than a handful of productivity applications, some telecommunications software, and BASIC, it just couldn't stack up, especially against "real" computers like the Amiga, PC, and Atari ST.

If XEGS was two years earlier the turn into computer feature may have been a good deal, especially if it retained an old price. It would also be when the 16-bits were new with problems and weren't so hot out the gate.

 

By end of 87, so may as well be 88, you are basically selling a machine that can turn into an A8 or C64 (which many already had) with the Amiga and cheaper ST now with more software and better pricing.

 

In Europe there would be even more options making the Xegs computer hybrid approach even more irrelevant. 

 

They really should have just went all in on Xegs being a game machine imo.