classic battle atari 8bit vs commodore 64

[Nukey Shay]

Maybe "cartridges" was used in place of "programs"...whether it was a Rom board, cassette tape, floppy disk, magazine listing, or whatever. In that case, neither computer has any. Actually quite a lot...considering all of the known and as-yet undiscovered programs that users did on their own. So whatever percentage you may have used (let alone had gotten any good at) would equate to next to nothing.

 

The moral is not to argue over something you know nothing about

[Level42]

Such objective posts are the reason why these threads never really work :/

Thank you for stating that my observations are objective. I totally agree.

[shoestring]

Atari 8 bit is better at the following points:

 

-Custom VLSI Chip quality (they don’t burn)

-overall build quality

-keyboard

-design (looks)

-speed

-colours

-sound (POKEY)

-BASIC

-Floppy Handling / DOS

-Floppy Speed

-convenience of connecting peripherals (SIO)

-1000S of cartridge titles

-best classic arcade conversions

 

The C64 is better at the following points:

- sprites

 

That’s it.

 

I know many will say SID, but I can’t stand it’s muffled and forced sound, plus it sucks at effect sounds and has one channel less.

 

Just sprites?

 

- Fine Scrolling

 

The c64 has finer horizontal scrolling, see games like Uridium. On the c64 you can scroll the sprites and bg 1 pixel at a time 320 pixels in all video modes. It's something the c64 does very naturally and other machines struggle to do.

 

They both use graphics and sound differently. How many dlists would you need to put the entire 256 on the screen and how much memory would you have left over for a game ? Not much. Thanks to the raster interrupt, the c64 seamlessly pushes 16 colours to the screen with audio and game logic.

 

Both machines have their strength's and weaknesses. Have both and enjoy the best of both worlds

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Level42]

A few other things:

 

1) The Ghostbusters symbol that you move around looks quite a bit better on the C64.

 

2) I get what you're saying with it shouting "Ghostbusters" all the time, but Atari is also missing the laughing, which sounded great.

 

3) Marshmallow Man at the end looks way better on the C64.

 

All moot points for me though, since I like the SMS best (except where are the voices, arrgh!).

1) That is called a sprite. As I said, that was the point (and only point) where the C64 was better.

2) uhhhhhh....the laughing is definitly there in the Atari version...... The “Ghostbusters” shouting when you catch a ghost could easily have been implemented in the A8 version as well, it is simply triggering the sample which is already somewhere in memory because it is shouted on the intro as well. IMHO it’s good they left it out....it gets annoying really quick.

3) see 1)

[Level42]

Just sprites?

 

- Fine Scrolling

 

The c64 has finer horizontal scrolling, see games like Uridium. On the c64 you can scroll the sprites and bg 1 pixel at a time 320 pixels in all video modes. It's something the c64 does very naturally and other machines struggle to do.

 

They both use graphics and sound differently. How many dlists would you need to put the entire 256 on the screen and how much memory would you have left over for a game ? Not much. Thanks to the raster interrupt, the c64 seamlessly pushes 16 colours to the screen with audio and game logic.

 

Both machines have their strength's and weaknesses. Have both and enjoy the best of both worlds

 

c64 + atari 800.jpg

 

Im not a programmer, but as far as I know the A8 has hardware scrolling too.

 

About the colours: Its not so much that I need to see 256 colours on screen.....but having EVERY game produce the SAME 16 colours is what totally turns me off from the C64. And what colours.....youd say the Atari people were smoking weird stuff but what did the VIC developers use when decided on those colours ? Maybe they just returned from the toilet ?

 

Anyway, its refreshing to see different (and vibrant) colours on different games. Take a look at Mr. Robot and Bounty Bob.....I love how those game use colours on the A8....

Edited October 29, 2018 by Level42

[Faicuai]

Best 25 PCs of ALL TIME:

 

https://www.pcworld.com/article/126692/greatest_pcs_of_all_time.html?page=5

 

Atari 800, page 5.

 

Commodore 64? Not in the list... And there are strong and objective reasons for it.

 

I remember, when I was a kid, my first job was at a computer store, in sales, and worked with ALL models, all sorts of computers. Bit by bit, gram by gram, the 800/XL was certainly the better system, overall... and pretty decently engineered THREE years BEFORE the C64!!!

 

Many people don't really know that IBM went to ATARI HQ's to discuss how to incporate the 800 as their Home / Personal computer product... sames as Bill Gates, which was hired by Atari as contractor... and then fired for being late... (of course, he chose to put all his energy with IBM, not a bad carreer move, at all)!

 

Edited October 29, 2018 by Faicuai

[Mclaneinc]

The Atari also has fine scroll registers which I played with trying to make a scroll map for a game when I was 'brighter' back in the day..

 

And yes the C64 palette looks very subdued, someone once (probably TMR told me why) and I also like the brighter more vibrant stuff compared in most cases to the C64 version BUT...HUGE BUT, which one plays best....That's the one I play...

 

I owe the Atari a LOT, it was my first job in computers after a huge interest in them and it lead to running a rather large electronics store and other jobs of similar ilk but when it comes to what I like to play it has to be what I enjoy the most, machine or maker have no part of the reasoning, its the game itself that I go for..

 

There are machines I'm not so hot on like the Spectrums BUT there are some cute games on them and the programmers for those made some wonderful stuff that was remade for other machines that I did like more, in the end it was the version I liked the best that won and yes, that even counts for Spectrum games...If it holds your attention and time just flies by then its probably a good game..(for you)

[Mr Robot]

This is like arguing over ribeye vs strip; they are both steak, sometimes you want a little more texture, sometimes a little more marbling, but either way if they are cooked right, they can both make you happy.

 

The Atari is a real computer that plays games, the C64 is a games machine you can use as a computer.

[R0ger]

What makes C64 less of a computer compared to Atari ?

[Mr Robot]

The OS and the peripheral device handling.

[Faicuai]

The OS and the peripheral device handling.

 

And if you toss in the 800 into the comparison, well...almost EVERYTHING: superior, Made-in-USA craftmanship, materials, modular design, keyboard, durability, expansion bays / slots... you name it.

 

I remember from my time selling these machines, the C64 had this funny, shit-looking appearance, and had this characteristic card-board case-quality to it... when you held it with your two hands, and applied rotational force longitudinally, it would crack-and-pop like fire-crackers... signs the "cheapo, bottom-of-the-barrel" industrial era of Tramiel, which later came into Atari... and produced the XE line, with the exact same traits: cheapo, bottom-of-the-barrel quality.

 

The truth, unfortunately.

Edited October 29, 2018 by Faicuai

[TMR]

I'll probably regret this but... bugger it, my effect preset loader had an interesting "feature" that took an hour to find so I need a break!

 

Im not a programmer, but as far as I know the A8 has hardware scrolling too.

It does, but he said that the C64 had finer horizontal scrolling which is true. The C64 basically works at 320x200 all the time even when displaying 160x200 resolution graphics, that means the latter modes can be moved in half pixel steps where the Atari has to shift complete pixels. It might not sound much, but at lower scrolling speeds that restriction will become noticeable quite quickly and it can sometimes have an adverse effect on gameplay depending on how collision detection is being done.

 

There's also the option on the C64 with the character-based mode used by Ghostbusters to mix between 8x8 and 4x8 pixel mode on a char by char basis; it isn't used to great effect in that particular example - the "Zuul" and "GHQ" text on the main playfield are high res amongst multicolour graphics without using sprites - but other games use this to far greater effect for spot detail on backgrounds.

[_The Doctor__]

Funny fact is that things were borrowed from Atari in some form or another for the Commodore, and you will find Commodore engineers that admit to it today. Some have even discussed how to bring some of those out in the Atari from what the Commodore group based their os, coding and chipset on. I think that speaks volumes and says a great deal. This is repeated throughout the industry. The slowly fess up where it all comes from. They came they saw or worked for Atari in some fashion. That was the seed for most of them. I am pleased to read and hear all those stories.

 

The Atari line always got the job done. It's more likely in a thousand years to find working original hardware Atari's possible than a original Commodores.

 

Atari didn't protect it's IP as well as it should have initially, didn't even really know how to do so... later on it did so when it was too late or too much to overcome if you think about it.

 

It truly was and indeed still is the computer of choice. Like most I've owned almost all of what came our way. The S-100's, 8 bit Atari, TT030, Falcon030, and Amiga were the machines that stuck. Honorable mention went to C64 and MegaSTE.

 

Today's machines are basically internet appliances to me, and used to serve the purposes needs by the earlier machines as a faster development tool.

 

The Atari chip set is programmable playground to be used in incredible and unexpected ways you always find that one more thing over the years that was in there waiting to provide just one more function, that little thing that makes it all happen. People who program on the Atari series can program on nearly anything down to the micro-controller level embedded or not on up. Signal level cycle exact stuff. That hasn't been my experience with the C64 only crowd.

Edited October 29, 2018 by _The Doctor__

[R0ger]

Are you sure you wouldn't be say the exact same thing about C64 if you happened to have C64 first ? IMHO the machines are virtually the same. Atari can do some things C64 can't, and C64 can do some thing Atari can't. Atari is more flexible, but then C64 is newer, and ended up with some nice features too.

And going as far as saying Atari produces better programmers ? Oh wait, is this a satiric thread ?

[_The Doctor__]

Atari programmers needed to do cycle exact work all the way along and in turn that made for some of the best experience to branch out into other areas. Programming on the 2600 on up brought this out in a great number of people at that time. The REQUIRED intimate understanding to race that beam certainly had such an impact. Utilizing the flexibility of the chips was not simply an option but to get things done might be required with the given constraints. All of this is a matter of record. It's evidenced through out the industry as mentioned in interview after interview. This was also carried out in the 8 bit line for some of the better more intricate and compact games/code.

 

Perfectly valid points all around. I still like the venerable and flexible Atari.

 

You do realize I have most of the different machines as well? S-100 based, Apple, TI, et el. Had to work with all of them. Only the Ataris and Amiga stayed in the house through out all of the years. The others cycle through but don't remain.

Edited October 29, 2018 by _The Doctor__

[Mr Robot]

Are you sure you wouldn't be say the exact same thing about C64 if you happened to have C64 first ? IMHO the machines are virtually the same. Atari can do some things C64 can't, and C64 can do some thing Atari can't. Atari is more flexible, but then C64 is newer, and ended up with some nice features too.

And going as far as saying Atari produces better programmers ? Oh wait, is this a satiric thread ?

No I definitely wouldn't be saying the same thing about the C64. It had the bare minimum of an OS to get the thing to power up, enable the tape and suck some data into RAM, anything else more sophisticated was a kludge, even the floppy disk is just a glorified tape drive. It was designed to be something great to play games on and at a price point no one else could match, it did that job fantastically.

 

Other discussions about whether Pokey is better than Sid and stuff like that are just subjective and therefore futile (we likes what we likes)

 

The Atari producing better programmers, thats just inflammatory hyperbole. Troll is effective.

[fujidude]

This is like arguing over ribeye vs strip; they are both steak, sometimes you want a little more texture, sometimes a little more marbling, but either way if they are cooked right, they can both make you happy.

 

The Atari is a real computer that plays games, the C64 is a games machine you can use as a computer.

 

Everyone knows Filet Mignon is the best though.

[Mr Robot]

 

Everyone knows Filet Mignon is the best though.

 

 

"Filet Mignon" the NES of steak; wildly popular but a poor imitation of a real steak

[shoestring]

 

I know many will say SID, but I can’t stand it’s muffled and forced sound, plus it sucks at effect sounds and has one channel less.

 

I've heard this argument a lot. But this has also been said multiple times even here regarding 4 vs 3 sound channels.

 

On the Atari you have an 8 bit frequency register, which means for some notes, you miss exact frequencies and melodies can sound out of tune. The only way around this is to combine two channels and that process reduces the amount of sound channels available.

 

SID. 3 channels + 16 bit frequency dividers, 4 waveforms , ADSR curve per channel, bandpass filter ( configurable ) , ring modulation, pulse width on square waveforms ( configurable )

POKEY: 4 channels + 8 bit frequency dividers, high pass filter ( not configurable ), 2 waveforms

[Faicuai]

 

I've heard this argument a lot. But this has also been said multiple times even here regarding 4 vs 3 sound channels.

 

On the Atari you have an 8 bit frequency register, which means for some notes, you miss exact frequencies and melodies can sound out of tune. The only way around this is to combine two channels and that process reduces the amount of sound channels available.

 

SID. 3 channels + 16 bit frequency dividers, 4 waveforms , ADSR curve per channel, bandpass filter ( configurable ) , ring modulation, pulse width on square waveforms ( configurable )

POKEY: 4 channels + 8 bit frequency dividers, high pass filter ( not configurable ), 2 waveforms

 

The problem is the mad-mosquito-like sound that the SID produces... not mellow, not sweet, not warm as most of the stuff POKEY outputs. Preppie, for example, is a HALLMARK of Pokey's sweetness, which I also remember hearing in several other titles on Atari, like Nautilus-intro, Alley-Cat, etc.

 

Sorry, but that's the "color" of C64 sound. It is unmistakable.

Edited October 30, 2018 by Faicuai

[_The Doctor__]

you mean that's not a bunch of slow note playing angry bees buzzing in the Commodore? I spray and spray the bees never go away.

[Zap!]

1) That is called a sprite. As I said, that was the point (and only point) where the C64 was better.

2) uhhhhhh....the laughing is definitly there in the Atari version...... The “Ghostbusters” shouting when you catch a ghost could easily have been implemented in the A8 version as well, it is simply triggering the sample which is already somewhere in memory because it is shouted on the intro as well. IMHO it’s good they left it out....it gets annoying really quick.

3) see 1)

 

1) & 3) No offense, but that's a huge "only." That's like saying the football team is great, they're "only" missing a quarterback. Or 2001 would have been an amazing year, if "only" there had been no 9/11.

2) Only on the title screen. It is not used when you are slimed by the ghosts or beaten by Marshmallow Man like in the C64 version. Now, this is definitely not the Atari's fault, it's pure lazy programming.

[Zap!]

 

Everyone knows Filet Mignon is the best though.

 

Not fatty enough.

[Geister]

Are you sure you wouldn't be say the exact same thing about C64 if you happened to have C64 first ? IMHO the machines are virtually the same. Atari can do some things C64 can't, and C64 can do some thing Atari can't. Atari is more flexible, but then C64 is newer, and ended up with some nice features too.

And going as far as saying Atari produces better programmers ? Oh wait, is this a satiric thread ?

Actually, I've always said the exact opposite. You had to be a brilliant programmer to get anything at all out of a Commodore 64. The Basic language had zero graphics commands. I/O commands were weak and inflexible compared to the Atari. At least programming the sound chips and sprites were about the same amount of effort on the two machines.

 

Somebody above mentioned something about how the C64 could put 16 colors seamlessly on the screen. That person has never programmed a C64 or he would know that the VIC II chip breaks the screen up into regions that can display only 4 out of the sixteen available colors. Seamless? I think rather a lot of seams, actually. I believe the Antic Chip and its display list interrupts allows the Atari to put more colors anywhere on the screen with fewer limitations. And all it takes is a little Page 6 ML routine that any hack programmer can borrow and use.

 

So yes, the Commodore C64 required much more of it's programmers to provide what the Atari hands its programmers on a silver platter. So between an Atari and a Commodore programmer, the Commodore program is probably the more skilled simply because of the larger handicap he (or she) had to overcome.

 

In the long run, though I agree with The Doctor that the Atari has the deeper depths to plumb and offers more to the programmer.

[shoestring]

 

The problem is the mad-mosquito-like sound that the SID produces... not mellow, not sweet, not warm as most of the stuff POKEY outputs. Preppie, for example, is a HALLMARK of Pokey's sweetness, which I also remember hearing in several other titles on Atari, like Nautilus-intro, Alley-Cat, etc.

 

Sorry, but that's the "color" of C64 sound. It is unmistakable.

 

You've only described one aspect of the SIDs sound attributes, yes it can sound very harsh and buzzy but it also can sound warm and mellow depending on how the chip is used. Good example of this is the Ghouls and Ghosts soundtrack by Tim Follin.

Edited October 30, 2018 by shoestring