Gorf Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 Quite true on the 16-bit-ish look of the games...but still it would be more games, and it would be because of some tools being familiar to devs. Putting an 030 in there would've been icing on that cake, because then you'd have ST and Falcon developers being fine with the tools on the European side of things, and Japanese developers being fine with the Motorolla chip (even though it's an 030 instead of a regular 68k, it's still familiar to them on some level). But, y'know...the Tramiels were in charge. And although Sam was less tight with the wallet than his old man, I'm pretty sure he still had to answer to ol' that tightwad Jack on some level, particularly when it came to the money spent. Cost was the only reason that an 020 or 030 wasn't in there, and, tbqh, even with that processor it wouldn't have cost that much more than the $249 the console cost at launch. But those Tramiels...notorious penny pinchers. Atari could've done a lot of things differently. But they didn't. That's why friggin' Infogrames (I absolutely refuse to call them Atari) owns the name now. The whole point of my post is that it was the 16 bitish looking games that gave the Jag a real bad rep...when that was all that came out of Atari after years of waiting, I do not think a billion such titles would have saved the Jaguar. The Jaguar needed more updated classics like T2K. I could think of many licenses Atari had too back when that would rock. Imagine a Jaguar Version of Stunn Runner or I Robot. Even Star Wars just liek the arcade game except with polygons. Nothing else different. More games like this, coaxing companies like Imagic and Activision to do Demon Attack 3D or Star Master 3D.Midway games liek pac 3D or TRon 3D would have been perfect fits for Jag G-shading. Trying to be Nintendo or Sega or Sony was the dumest thing they could do. As far as the Tramiels go...A simple case of killer potential in the hands of incompetent people. They were definitely not gamers..that's for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+davidcalgary29 Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 The whole point of my post is that it was the 16 bitish looking games that gave the Jag a real bad rep...when that was all that came out of Atari after years of waiting, I do not think a billion such titles would have saved the Jaguar. I think the bigger problem is that very few people had spent years waiting for the Jag. Atari hadn't had a real console success since...well, the 2600, and Atari, unlike any other console maker, couldn't draw on the goodwill of its fans to count on sales. There was nothing wrong with the Jag's poorer releases (in comparison to most other games then available for other systems), but it just wasn't enough to draw gamers away to a by-then unknown company. As far as the Tramiels go...A simple case of killer potential in the hands of incompetent people.They were definitely not gamers..that's for sure. There's a real possibility that the Jag would have been vapourware if it hadn't been for the Tramiels. Hadn't Flare shopped their system around to all the majors before washing up -- in an act of desperation -- at Atari? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiffyone Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 I gotta disagree with the "Jag needed more updated classics". I like Tempest 2K. And Defender and the rest. But the fact is that gamers at the time didn't for the most part. What game had gamers at the time interested in Jag, if they were interested? Alien vs. Predator. That was the "killer app". Atari needed more of those (original killer apps). Throw in a few updated classics, sure, but those weren't going to set the world on fire. And my whole point is that they needed more product on the shelves. The Falcon games aren't exactly 16-bittish looking in comparison to Genesis and SNES. Well...some are, but others aren't. Regardless, with better tools more games would've been made which would've enticed gamers more. That's what Atari needed. Not only games that showed off what Jag could do, but more games in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorf Posted August 7, 2007 Share Posted August 7, 2007 I gotta disagree with the "Jag needed more updated classics". I like Tempest 2K. And Defender and the rest. But the fact is that gamers at the time didn't for the most part. What game had gamers at the time interested in Jag, if they were interested? Alien vs. Predator. That was the "killer app". Atari needed more of those (original killer apps). Throw in a few updated classics, sure, but those weren't going to set the world on fire. And my whole point is that they needed more product on the shelves. The Falcon games aren't exactly 16-bittish looking in comparison to Genesis and SNES. Well...some are, but others aren't. Regardless, with better tools more games would've been made which would've enticed gamers more. That's what Atari needed. Not only games that showed off what Jag could do, but more games in general. It's a fact that the Jaguars death had much to do with those 16 bit titles. You 've read the reviews. Im sure a little googling will bring ou much in the way of articles bashing the Jaguar's 16 bitness look to the games. Classic Updates....there is a list a million miles long of titles Atari could have used and updated and even put a few into 1st person views that would have been moer than worthy of the gamers of it's time. I know that would have helped. The best you may have gotten from Falcon ports is a few dedicated Atari fans...mostly Falcon fans....and a few Amiga and ST fans. You woul not have grabbed the next generation. History is right there to tell you this. 16 bitters killed the Jaguar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunstar Posted August 8, 2007 Share Posted August 8, 2007 That's why friggin' Infogrames (I absolutely refuse to call them Atari) owns the name now. Aren't they still called Infogrames in France/Europe? I thought they only changed the U.S. division to Atari. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christos Posted August 22, 2007 Author Share Posted August 22, 2007 Wait. Before this thread gets locked, can someone actually show a few games? I've looked for a Falcon site with no success, Youtube has lots of demos, and one Joust platformer with no attacks... How bad can this system be? I am resurrecting this because I made a few vids (more to come). I am going to be collecting the video links on a post on my blog so as not to make multiple thread posts. Here's the post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atari_Owl Posted August 22, 2007 Share Posted August 22, 2007 Wait. Before this thread gets locked, can someone actually show a few games? I've looked for a Falcon site with no success, Youtube has lots of demos, and one Joust platformer with no attacks... How bad can this system be? As with the others i don't think its a bad system at all.. as the last of the ST family i'm very fond of it.. in fact i prefer it to the Jag.. regardless of relative power or sparsity of games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Math You Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 I think the Jaguar has a resolution of 800 x 600 compared to the Falcons 640 x 480. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorf Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 I think the Jaguar has a resolution of 800 x 600 compared to the Falcons 640 x 480. 800x600 and higher are possible on the Jag but with added hardware. You can go up to 800 horizontal pixels and MAYBE 480 vertical as it is stock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Math You Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 Just out of curiosity, could the Jaguars resolution be altered to display at 720 x 480 (NTSC DVD Quality) ? Perhaps it could be modified to work as a DVD laserdisc console. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zerosquare Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 Just out of curiosity, could the Jaguars resolution be altered to display at 720 x 480 (NTSC DVD Quality) ?Yes, the stock hardware can do that. Perhaps it could be modified to work as a DVD laserdisc console."DVD laserdisc" ? Playing Video CDs might be possible if someone managed to write a GPU and DSP-based MPEG1 decoder that was fast enough (I don't know if this can be done). Expecting anything beyond that is unreasonable IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory DG Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 Playing Video CDs might be possible if someone managed to write a GPU and DSP-based MPEG1 decoder that was fast enough (I don't know if this can be done).Expecting anything beyond that is unreasonable IMHO. I seem to remember before the Jaguar CD was released that they were showing video clips of Jaws with the idea that it could play full length movies. Maybe with a decoder cartridge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zerosquare Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 (edited) Maybe with a decoder cartridge?Yes, now that you mention it I remember such a thing was planned (info taken from Curt Vendel's website) : Edited August 25, 2007 by Zerosquare Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christos Posted August 25, 2007 Author Share Posted August 25, 2007 Just one thing, the falcon has no problem of going upto 800x608 on VGA and 1600x600 on RGB (the interlace is pretty bad there though). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorf Posted August 25, 2007 Share Posted August 25, 2007 Just one thing, the falcon has no problem of going upto 800x608 on VGA and 1600x600 on RGB (the interlace is pretty bad there though). The Jag was never intended to run on anything more thanyour TV, unlike the Falcon. The fact that a console could do that high a rez in that day is amazing in itself. The Jaguar chipset can do 1100+ horizontally with the right circuitry. In fact I think you can even add it to the Jaguar as it is with a few parts. You are preaching to the chior. I love the Falcon030. I just think the Jaguar has more portential by far as a gaming machine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christos Posted August 25, 2007 Author Share Posted August 25, 2007 Ehmm, I am not trying to preach anything to anyone as I don't like to be preached upon. I was just referring to a comment made by MRB. On your other point the Falcon was mostly intended to be RGB for games and VGA for serious stuff. The fact that it can play ST games (RGB) on VGA is pretty amazing on it's own. I love the Falcon030. I just think the Jaguar has more portential by far as a gamingmachine. Well I obviously love the falcon too (and I share the same emotions for the jag though it killed the atari computer division ) but from the games I' ve played... no comment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorf Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 Ehmm, I am not trying to preach anything to anyone as I don't like to be preached upon. I was just referring to a comment made by MRB. On your other point the Falcon was mostly intended to be RGB for games and VGA for serious stuff. The fact that it can play ST games (RGB) on VGA is pretty amazing on it's own. I love the Falcon030. I just think the Jaguar has more portential by far as a gamingmachine. Well I obviously love the falcon too (and I share the same emotions for the jag though it killed the atari computer division ) but from the games I' ve played... no comment That's because trying to use ALN and MADMAC for the ST to make the Jaguar do what it can is ludicrous but what the developers were stuck with. I need a coder that understand machine descriptors. Then I can fix the tools issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GT Turbo Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 Just one thing, the falcon has no problem of going upto 800x608 on VGA and 1600x600 on RGB (the interlace is pretty bad there though). You're right Christos, i use my Falcon in 800*592 GT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christos Posted August 26, 2007 Author Share Posted August 26, 2007 Just one thing, the falcon has no problem of going upto 800x608 on VGA and 1600x600 on RGB (the interlace is pretty bad there though). You're right Christos, i use my Falcon in 800*592 GT Will join you once I get my phantomS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Math You Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 Just one thing, the falcon has no problem of going upto 800x608 on VGA and 1600x600 on RGB (the interlace is pretty bad there though). You're right Christos, i use my Falcon in 800*592 GT Does this require special hardware (or computer trickery!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christos Posted August 26, 2007 Author Share Posted August 26, 2007 No hardware, just some playing with the videl registers. The phantomS is a speeder that helps with the added bandwidth required. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GT Turbo Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 Will join you once I get my phantomS I'm waiting for a phantomS too I've got a 128 Megs CT63 Falcon For big screen try this : http://centek.free.fr/atari/softs/s_centsc.htm Or Videl Inside, sorry i haven't found a good webpage for this program. GT Turbo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christos Posted August 26, 2007 Author Share Posted August 26, 2007 Will join you once I get my phantomS I'm waiting for a phantomS too I've got a 128 Megs CT63 Falcon For big screen try this : http://centek.free.fr/atari/softs/s_centsc.htm Or Videl Inside, sorry i haven't found a good webpage for this program. GT Turbo You and the half falcon owning population . Unfortunately I am without a CT6x but that might change in the future . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GT Turbo Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 You and the half falcon owning population . Unfortunately I am without a CT6x but that might change in the future . Yes, the Fastest Atari Computer, a CT6x Falcon. And a big thanks to SebRmv (Removers) who has lend me an Ethernat Card GT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorf Posted August 26, 2007 Share Posted August 26, 2007 Well I obviously love the falcon too (and I share the same emotions for the jag though it killed the atari computer division The Jaguar killed Atari period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
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.