classic battle atari 8bit vs commodore 64

[fujidude]

How does that phrase go? "Shoulda' coulda' woulda'."

[Gunstar]

That is quite remarkable, compared to the C64 where pretty much every game released past 1985 said C64/C128 even though it wouldn't run in C128 mode anyway, just being compatible with the computer if it was booted in C64 mode. Also the mentioned ZX Spectrum games most definitely said 128 in case they were enhanced for it. If there were several games with enhanced features on the 130XE, but not mentioned elsewhere than small print or not at all, it was almost like game publishers were afraid to lose sales from people who didn't understand the difference between "also supports" and "requires".

Here is an example of a commercial program that can use 128K, and it was never highlighted in advertising, or mentioned in reviews that i recall, if you just happen to see the game in person in a shop, you might have noticed...look closely under the gold corner sticker that says 48K...maybe in the actual instruction manual it would be mentioned too, maybe not. IIRC, my version of 221 Baker Street by Datasoft only said 64K on the box gold sticker and I didn't find out about 128K enhancements until I read the manual.

Edited December 5, 2018 by Gunstar

[José Pereira]

Here is an example of a commercial program that can use 128K, and it was never highlighted in advertising, or mentioned in reviews that i recall, if you just happen to see the game in person in a shop, you might have noticed...look closely under the gold corner sticker that says 48K...maybe in the actual instruction manual it would be mentioned too, maybe not. IIRC, my version of 221 Baker Street by Datasoft only said 64K on the box gold sticker and I didn't find out about 128K enhancements until I read the manual.

But at least it says on that stick label at the left bottom of the package ...

[Gunstar]

But at least it says on that stick label at the left bottom of the package ...

Yes, but it wasn't good enough for me, who did most of his software shopping via mail-order since Atari software was hard to find in stores where I lived. I was big into these types of games, but generally stuck with the tried and true like SSI simulations. But at the time I would have jumped at Bismark had I known it would have used the 128K of my 130XE, me and my XE were starving for 128K software...I had Alternate Reality and Atari Writer+ and 221 Baker Street as the only programs I knew of that used it...years later I am finding more and more software that did use it back then, but didn't try and make sure people knew! Another lost sale for Datasoft due to lack of information. I just discovered this one today while window-shopping on eBay! Now I'll go download it and try it...for free...

Edited December 5, 2018 by Gunstar

[jnharmon]

From a graphics and sounds perspective, I'd mostly (but not in ever aspect) give the edge to the C64.

 

However, from a computing standpoint, the OS and device model, the separation of OS and DOS from BASIC, the ability to boot, etc, I think the Atari is a much better and more logically thought out computing platform.

[Gunstar]

From a graphics and sounds perspective, I'd mostly (but not in ever aspect) give the edge to the C64.

 

However, from a computing standpoint, the OS and device model, the separation of OS and DOS from BASIC, the ability to boot, etc, I think the Atari is a much better and more logically thought out computing platform.

I see the C64 as having an edge on sprite graphics, but the 800 line makes up for it in modes and mixability and color in spades. Maybe the C64 will always be technically superior on the number of on-screen sprites, but that's about it and there's a lot more to graphics than sprites. Sound-wise, maybe it can reach a high note the Atari can't but it's not enough to make up for the extra voice and ability to mix voices for 16-bit and higher octaves that way.

 

The Atari has two short-comings compared to the C64, IMHO, which are made up for with dozens and dozens of advantages of all types in every area, your OS DOS language model as just being one area. I/O is far superior, nearly twice the clock speed, more expandability in most models, even back to the original 800 with expanded memory possibilities and new personality and CPU card that could be swapped in, let alone the PBI.

 

Anyway, I really like both computers, but I just get tired of the constant pointing to more sprites and extra octaves in an arguably better sound chip making the machine and being "all that" compared to the A8 line when all you have to do is pull back the curtain and see how much more the Atari can do that the C64 cannot.

 

Overall, even graphically, looking at all both systems can do I personally think the Atari is superior, by a large margin. I'd rather have it's advantages to more sprites, but then I lean toward graphic arts more than game graphics as to what I like between the systems.

Edited December 5, 2018 by Gunstar

[carlsson]

But at the time I would have jumped at Bismark had I known it would have used the 128K of my 130XE, me and my XE were starving for 128K software...

 

Is the support for maximum hardware more valuable than whether one likes the software? If Bismark was a game to your tastes, you likely would've bought it no matter if it used the full 128K or not.

 

As mentioned there were very few commercial C128 games. At one point in time it was said those could be counted on one hand's fingers, at least if you exclude C64 games that had some enhancement if run on a C128, like more music, more data stored in memory for fewer load sequences etc. I know Audiogenic released a cricket game exclusive to the C128 and one of the magazines reviewed it entirely on the premise it was one of the few, perhaps first C128 game they had seen. While cricket as a sport seems quite incomprehenible for anyone outside of the UK, India and a few more Commonwealth countries, quite possibly Audiogenic got a bunch of additional sales just because it was one of the few, uncommon native C128 games at the time.

[emkay]

About the C128. I'd bet, a native Z80 program using the hardware right, could blast 80% of all 8-Bits away.

[Gunstar]

 

Is the support for maximum hardware more valuable than whether one likes the software? If Bismark was a game to your tastes, you likely would've bought it no matter if it used the full 128K or not.

 

If you have limited resources and more titles that you want than you can afford, you have to pick and choose what you think you may like the most and what gives the most "bang" for the buck. If I'd have known this was one of the rare 128K supporting games, yes, I most definitely would have taken a chance and chosen 128K Bismark over say, 48K Broadsides game, even though the Broadsides game may have been closer to my liking in strategy and simulation genres. Broadsides is an SSI game I did purchase. I don't recall if Bismark was a choice yet, or that I knew about at the time I chose Broadsides though...

Might I have been disappointed? Possibly, I'll let you know after I play it for a bit and then play Broadsides again which I haven't played in years. I'm not suggesting I'm comparing apples to apples here with these two games, but they are both strategy/simulation type of games.

Edited December 5, 2018 by Gunstar

[+David_P]

. I'm not suggesting I'm comparing apples to apples here with these two games, but they are both strategy/simulation type of games.

 

Of course you're not comparing apples to apples here. This thread is comparing two other 8-bit computers, Atari and Commodore

[peteym5]

A few pages back, I expressed interest in doing some Commodore 64 games, and almost right away some members jumped in and stated games will be pirated almost right away, making it seem that community is full of pirates. It is really a hand full that do this is secret and avoid public forums.

 

However, I had decided not to be involve myself with porting any of my software to the Commodore 64. it is more of a time factor as I am busy with many other projects. I really need to hand it over to someone who has the time to do the work. If someone wishes to create their own version of my game titles, I can provide some pointers, and privately send them some information and subroutines to help make their game work good.

 

I looked into ideas of pre-orders and delay until enough orders are in before one big first ship out, maybe up to week. That helps the author or programmer get their money. As long as the wait is not too long. Keep the software up for sale for those that who wish to still support the author for future products. Not everyone buys the software right away. Many wait, probably don't have extra money right away, or wait for someone else to show it to them. My games are actually sale more over time than something that is a one time release.

Edited December 6, 2018 by peteym5

[shoestring]

About the C128. I'd bet, a native Z80 program using the hardware right, could blast 80% of all 8-Bits away.

 

What advantages do you see the z80 having over the 8502 in the c128 ?

 

They were both clocked at 2mhz which really hurt the z80s performance. The normal clock speed for a z80 is around 3mhz which is slightly better in performance compared to a 6502 when clocked at 1mhz.

 

Commodore's engineers were really only concerned about CP/M compatibility on the z80 side of things.

[Gunstar]

 

Of course you're not comparing apples to apples here. This thread is comparing two other 8-bit computers, Atari and Commodore

I'd never bother stooping to the level of comparing either a C64 or an A8 to an Apple. It's an insult to either one of them.

Yeah, I know, this was off main subject. But it did start out as C128 and 130XE 128K software and drifted from there...

Edited December 6, 2018 by Gunstar

[emkay]

What advantages do you see the z80 having over the 8502 in the c128 ?

 

They were both clocked at 2mhz which really hurt the z80s performance. The normal clock speed for a z80 is around 3mhz which is slightly better in performance compared to a 6502 when clocked at 1mhz.

 

Commodore's engineers were really only concerned about CP/M compatibility on the z80 side of things.

The Z80 has "problems" with huge cycle counts for the commands. But it has those nifty 16 bit commands that were missing in the 65xx processors. What makes the C64 slow is particular that.

The VICII offers a lot features that allow to have a CPU slow at bus commands, but any screen movement needs RAM copies as fast as possible.

[Heaven/TQA]

Some thoughts

 

I recently got a c128d... nice one and I thought i can use the z80 in parallel. But it was clocked with 2mhz instead of 4... but that machine still deserves some code of mine some day.

 

Interesting mentioning the coco3... started recently some code on it (pssst ) and the 6809 is one of the best 8bit cpu i have to admit. The gfx chip is nice too and has some nice tricks (like doubling scanlines, scanline length modulo etc) which we know from Jay Miner since 70s... I have to admit no sound chip and fixed weird palette sux but hey you can not have it all....

 

And yes... now with retro respect Atari did not invested in hardware dev of the 8bit lines for ages even in xe eras... its still the 1978/79 design sold 8 years later where Moores law was working with fast leaps.

[shoestring]

Those 16bit commands are very handy, that's one thing I miss about coding on the z80.

 

The 6809 is similar in that regard, for handling 16bit data arithmetic. The 16 bit index register was something that I really missed once I moved to the 6502, the ZP is a good compromise though, it just takes a little more work to set things up.

[carlsson]

If I recall correctly, all I/O including access to the VIC-II and SID is run through the 8502, even in Z80 mode. As noted, the 2 MHz Z80 in the C128 is nothing to write home about, no matter how powerful opcodes it has. Though it depends what your code does, roughly it is said that 1 MHz on a 6502 derivate equals 3 MHz on a Z80 derivate. Many of the other Z80 computers were clocked either at 3.58 MHz which equals the NTSC video/colour burst frequency or something like that, or 4 MHz if they had a separate clock.

[sack-c0s]

About the C128. I'd bet, a native Z80 program using the hardware right, could blast 80% of all 8-Bits away.

 

The z80 is clocked slow (2mhz i think) on the 128 to get it to work with the system bus - People seem to be of the opinion that the 6502 would just outperform it.

 

I think the 16-bit registers and the stack handling is better on Z80, so it is sometimes nicer to code for, but for me it's the custom chips that make the machine - and that almost always leads back to the 6502.

That said - there's always the Sega Mastersystem....

[popmilo]

A few pages back, I expressed interest in doing some Commodore 64 games, and almost right away some members jumped in and stated games will be pirated almost right away, making it seem that community is full of pirates. It is really a hand full that do this is secret and avoid public forums.

I wouldn't worry about it at all. If game is good it will sell. Good packaging, manual, quality carts etc is worth a lot.

 

ps. Doesn't matter if it's Atari or C64...

 

Example is:

[Gunstar]

The key there is good packaging and manual and quality carts or whatever medium. Take a look at any of the games released in limited release over the last few years. Some you can even still get, like Laura, but I know peteym5 is well aware from participation in such a thread: http://atariage.com/forums/topic/254186-homebrew-games-packages/?hl=%2Blaura&do=findComment&comment=4126451

 

Quality packaging means attracting collectors and instance collector item status. It doesn't even matter to many if the game itself is any good! Sales would double or triple overnight with quality packaging and manuals and other bonuses.

 

I reviewed some Video 61 exclusives, purchased them myself, for Excel issue 4 or 5, and we pictured the packaging in that issue, but I just, for Video 61's sake, totally ignored it in the review, and treated the games as if like the free digital downloads like many of the games are we review. But the packaging is quite honestly cheap and it looks cheap: deskjet printed labels for the cartridges and packaging. Same with one sheet instructions that are just home-brew prints that are lamenated. Then the cheap plastic hang-on-a-rack disposable style cases too.The packaging and presentation of Video 61 games is crap and your sales will directly reflect that fact. Improve releases to professional collector quality and sales will increase to make it worth it. I could create better packaging (boxesor cases) and manuals by hand in my home by myself. MUCH BETTER. The packaging, I believe, is a direct representation of how much the product is cared about, believed in and supported by the authors and publishers.

 

I know. as I'm a collector too. You know what I collect for vintage stuff? It depends on the quality of the packaging, usually Avalon Hill, SSI, Epyx, Infocom and others that have sturdy boxes that have lasted and quality manuals and bonus inserts. The program contained within is of secondary importance to my physical collection. Quality packaging in good condition comes first.

Edited December 6, 2018 by Gunstar

[kiwilove]

My own personal opinion is (and I speak for myself only) --- is that I'm no collector --- that

All the best packaging possible - to please the collectors --- does not change the fact of what the quality the software actually is - like.

It doesn't enhance it (the software/game) one bit.

 

The best games produced for this hardware - that it would be nice if they did have great packaging/etc to go with their prestige.

And while there has been some great packaging / etc made for some recent homebrews - I doubt if they rank with the best games made?

 

I'm always a big fan of the Zaxxon coin-op -- and never felt that any decent home version was made for the Atari's.

And while the C-64 Synapse conversion was/is the best 8-bit conversion done - it still falls short of what one likes?

Maybe I am asking for the impossible? That some games are simply too hard to be converted to home computer hardware?

That it takes too much time/effort/etc to be done well? It will always be the exception/rare that anyone would produce something

outstanding - at this late stage. Even harder for it to be commercially viable.

Good luck for those who want to try...

 

Harvey

[peteym5]

I am not sure why Tremial did not do any upgrades to the Atari 8-bit going to XE, just running the CPU at 2X would had been a faster cheap computer on the market in 1985.

 

Something I had noticed about Commodore 64 Games, they may look good, but they seem to move choppy and limit number of onscreen moving objects compared to the Atari 8-bit counterpart. Is the game running in machine language or Basic? Obviously, it can be seen it has a slower CPU and needs to do more operations trying to animate stuff on the screen. Then again, it could some programmers did not know how to do some stuff. Possibly used a compiled language instead of direct assembly. I know I can make a game similar to my Secretum Labyrinth run just as smooth on the Commodore 64 as the Atari 8-bit version through optimized assembly language.

[shoestring]

I am not sure why Tremial did not do any upgrades to the Atari 8-bit going to XE, just running the CPU at 2X would had been a faster cheap computer on the market in 1985.

 

He wanted to create a "family of computers" that had the same look. I don't know what he was thinking there.. should have just focused on the ST at that point.

 

By 1985, the 8bit line were starting to becoming obsolete and then we saw new exciting tech, the Macintosh, Amiga, ST, then the Acorn RISC machines, consoles.

 

Sure we did see some attempts to get more life out of the 8 bits with the C128 , Apple IIgs ..etc, but these weren't nearly as successful,

 

 

 

 

Something I had noticed about Commodore 64 Games, they may look good, but they seem to move choppy and limit number of onscreen moving objects compared to the Atari 8-bit counterpart. Is the game running in machine language or Basic?

 

Maniac Mansion used a scripting language called SCUMM ( Script Creation Utility for Maniac Mansion ). By the late 80s, games started to become so complex that it was extremely difficult to program them in 100% assembler. So the choppiness you see in some of the later games may be attributed to this.

[almightytodd]

Hmmmm

[carlsson]

Back in the old days, it was said that Infocom adventure games rarely were pirated, because the game took use of so much feelies and extras included with the game, that a digital copy would make the game more boring or impossible to play. Not just the usual copy protection in form of quoting the manual, but actual items. Whether there was some truth to this, I'm not sure but to be honest I didn't really encounter any Infocom games through my usual channels, though I obtained other adventure games.

 

Nowadays you can scan docs and supply, but other items are harder to distribute electronically. I don't know if peteym5 would be willing to conceive game concepts that rely on access to items outside of the game just to stand out from the crowd, and given the comments above about the basic packaging perhaps it wouldn't be possible to deliver anyway, but it would be interesting to try out.